So I just downloaded the March 2010 supplement file and imported it into SwissSys, and I’ve noticed something odd. Each time I import a supplement file, I check my own data to see whether it’s been updated. Here’s what the player info on the USCF website says about me:
2010-03 762 707
2010-01 799 761
2009-12 818 779
[size=85](Please keep snide comments about my playing strength to yourselves. Muchas gracias.)[/size]
However, even after importing supplements for December, January, February and March, SwissSys still lists me as rated 818. Of greater concern is that it still lists my membership as expiring on Feb. 28, even though I renewed some time ago and have already received my new membership card. If my information is messed up, there’s a good chance that other players’ information is as well.
Am I doing something wrong? Do I have some fundamental misunderstanding about how the supplement files work? I’m simply using SwissSys’s “Import Supplement” command on the TARSFLE file that I extract from the Zip folder.
Are you indexing the files? I know in the past when I didn’t do this, it appended the records to the list, so there would be several “ratings” for your name or ID (depending on which you looked under).
I strongly second that recommendation. I’m not sure how it happened, but I have seen the SwissSys database end up with duplicate entries for players (not all players, but some, which is even more entertaining) when importing the rating supplements. I definitely think just grabbing the “golden” database each month (and then choosing “Index database…” from the “Database” menu is the way to go).
I have been doing the indexing, but I’ll try the “Golden” thing . . . if someone can explain where to find it?
ETA: Never mind, scrolled down and found it.
EATA: Well, I’m a dingbat. The reason the supplements weren’t updating is that I wasn’t importing the new supplements – the file menu defaulted to the SwissSys directory rather than the desktop, so I was just importing the same supplement over and over again.
If you have multiple versions of the golden database (such as Feb 2010 and Mar 2010 - you may want to use the Feb supplement for a tournament this weekend but have the Mar supplement available for unrated or to check on more recent memberships) then in WinTD you need to say which directory has the supplement that you want to use. SwissSys probably has something similar.
Another question about the rating supplements:
It appears that the 2009 Annual Rating List contains only those people who appeared in one of the 2009 monthly rating supplements, whereas the 2008 Annual Rating List contains all people who had ever appeared in any rating supplement. Was this difference intentional?
I don’t believe that’s the case, because if it contained everyone in our records who has a published rating the 2008 list would have had nearly 495,000 people on it. (And yes, that means that there are some 235,000 people who have a USCF ID but not a published rating, since there are nearly 730,000 records in the Golden Master file.)
I suspect the difference has to do with rerates.
Although it isn’t measuring quite the same thing, here are the number of unique USCF IDs in rated events by year (based on the ending date of the event):
I had based my statement on three players, one of whom hadn’t played in a tournament since 2006 and two of whom hadn’t played in a tournament since 2007, but all of whom were listed in the 2008 Annual Rating List. But I see from doing a Player/Rating Lookup on each of them that they were, indeed, rerated in 2008.
I’m wondering now why the USCF even bothers to maintain any files besides the golden files, since even if someone looked at the 2008 Annual Rating List, and the 2009 Annual Rating List, and each of the monthly supplements for 2010, he still wouldn’t be able to tell for certain whether someone had a published rating.
If somebody has a dial-up connection then they would want to upload the smaller monthly files. Also, those have the number of games for provisional players.
Personally I think it is much more valuable to have the golden files which include new members that don’t have any games yet, but I don’t worry about the time needed for large downloads.