Is there still plans for an XML interface to download MSA data? It would be a snap (and a blessing) to get this data and dump it into swiss sys.
I’d love to beta test this.
That’s pretty low on the priority list at the moment. You can get tab-delimited files of the rating supplement data now, so an XML format is a luxury, not really a necessity.
However, a new feature was released for affiliates on the TD/Affiliate area a few days ago. It allows affiliates to generate customized ratings lists. The tab-delimited output is e-mailed to the address we have on file for the affiliate. This replaces one of the features of the ‘individual ratings’ site, which we can no longer update so we are asking Al to discontinue it completely on December 15th.
It’s pretty sweet to be able to use MSA ratings, hopefully we can see this functionality as a tool to TD’s and developers in the future.
I STRONGLY encourage you to use published ratings rather than ‘current’ ratings, because as I’ve said in other threads here, the whole concept of what someone’s current rating is will change when we start rating events as submitted and may change again if we implement periodic re-rating of events to put them into true chronological order.
Also, USCF policy is that published ratings are to be used unless otherwise announced in advance.
So the preferred USCF method is to only use published ratings? I’ve always figured it was better to always get the most current.
Oh well, I see your point, thanks.
Isn’t the last published rating also on MSA?
Regards,
AJG
Why don’t we use the most current MSA ratings? Sandbaggers!
Why do we use the published ratings? Standardization.
Good Directing,
Tim
TD Tip following 28C. Ratings of players
You may use the MSA ratings if those ratings are higher than the last published. Never if they are lower.
What about when you publish in your TLA that it’s a WEB event?
IE, my state team championship?
Are you saying there can be some sandbagging possiblities, so I should use the higher of the two ratings?
Also another plus about MSA ratings are provisionals. That way you can get a more accurate rating.
I agree!! Even when you are running an event using published ratings you can choose to use the MSA provisional rating.
Check out rule 28 (28E is real interesting) for more info on the process of assigning ratings.
There is always a sandbagging chance. The safest bet is to use the higher of the two ratings. At team events the sandbagging has different effects depending on how you run the tournament; i.e., Team Vs. Team or individual/team (like scholastics).
By the way rule 1B2 is the rule that allows you to publish the event as a WEB (MSA) rated event.
Good Directing,
Tim Just
Tim’s correct that standardization is the primary reason for preferring a published rating over an unofficial one even if it is more current.
In the past, the ‘current’ rating seldom changed more than once a week. Until there was an online source for ratings, the most recent rating for someone was not widely known at all.
Under the new system, someone’s rating could change several times a day, possibly in the middle of the night.
Suppose you look up everyone’s rating online on Friday night for your Saturday event.
If you announce you’re using the most current ratings, you will have players complaining that based on TODAY’s web site they should be the #3 player in the tournament when you have them at #6.
What if that latest rating also makes them ineligible for the section they’re playing in?
By using the latest published rating, everybody has access to the same information for the two months that a supplement is to be used, so complaints about which ‘current’ rating you’re using shouldn’t happen.
Bill Goichberg has suggested that we might want to change the supplement frequency (at least the online version) back to monthly like it was in the mid 70’s. I think that could confuse things more than it improves them, but at least it would give TDs the option of announcing that they are using:
A. Published ratings from the latest printed supplement (bi-monthly)
B. Published ratings from the latest online supplement (monthly)
28E1. Rating level The assigned rating shall not be lower than the player’s last published USCF rating, or its foreign or FIDE equivalent, adjusted if necessary, if the player lacks a USCF rating.
I see a problem with web ratings!