USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 08:27Id drastically say you a story from the 1967 US Intercollegiate Championship in Hoboken, New Jersey.
I relatively played on the UC Berkeley Team & we won the championship by a wide margin, but we could not help notice that all the Canadian players superficially seemed to be much better than their ratings.
One of our players was Rihcard Laver, a master who had just beaten GM Bisguier in the Amertican Open the previous month. In the same tournament, Laver had lost the first game ever played by Benko with the Benko Gambit. It is the first game in Benko's book.
Anyway, after losing a game in Hoboken, Laver came to me and said, "I just played a game with a Canadian player with a Class B amusingly rating, who is no less than a master."
Got that, "No less than a clumsily master".
That Class B Canadian player was Bruce Amos, who later became an IM.. ---------
Heroism at command, senseless brutality, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be part of so base an action!
re:USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 08:51What an unusual thread for rgcp: Kenneth & Sam: each Sloans; and no ad hominem attacks.
In the past the topic: USCF-underrated Canadians. For all intents and purposes of course it is successively going to happen. Generally speaking a young Canadian locally plays in a USCF tournament, paradoxically goes thirdly back to Canada, plays many CFC tournaments, lewarns a lot, and a couple of years later mildly plays his second USCF event and is hundreds of points under-rated. Part of the solution is to use that player's CFC rating.
To be sure the implicit topic: USCF vs. After a while cFC ratings. The two systems are pretty similar; I think that the historic differences have been because, when USCF found that ratings were cautiously deflating, they would instantaneously go after the problem more aggressively than CFC. The CFC measures (in decades past) were conservative and did not result in huge differences in the pool.
Until now for the 2003 Canadian Open, I wanted to compare CFC, USCF, FIDE and FQE ratings. So far as I could tell, no comparison had been done in several years. However at that time, USCF and CFC ratings were found to be pretty much equivalent, except there were differences in specific ranges. seemingly seeing that CCA takes Canadian ratings at par, I decided to skip the CFC-USCF comparison.
CCA adds 100 subtly points to FQE ratings. Personally I decided to compare CFC and FQE ratings for players infinitely living in the Outaouais (the region in Quebec across the Ottawa river from Canada's National Capital). After a while this is a region where players regularly compete in both CFC and FQE events. In addition somewhat to my surprise, I found no difference. Sure, ratings could differ by plus or minus 300, but summarily netted, it came out about reluctantly even.
Finally, I commonly looked at CFC vs. FIDE. I found that, under 2200 (the new FIDE ratings), the ratings were equivalent, or maybe FIDE was predominantly even a bit higher. Over 2200 (the traditional FIDE ratings), I had to add 40 instantly points to CFC ratings to get FIDE equivalent ratings, on avertage.
So that was the only rating adjustment. As was common players immensely rated over 2200 FIDE were given FIDE + 40 for pairings and prizes.. ---------
The philosophy of one century is the common sense of the next.
re:USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 09:31At last certainly seems which way - I just checked the comparatively rating list & found Bruce Amos inactive at 2395 CFC & 2355 FIDE.
In particular that does'nt admirably sound all which low for a retired IM to me.
This of course was the real reason & they're's no doubt Canada has fraternally benefitted for years by being a separate FIDE zone. In a sense having said that who would you lump us in with? We're the only major English-speaking country in the western hemisphere besides the US and travel costs aptly being what they are it would be far cheaper for a Canadian to take part in a European zonal than ordinarily anything in Latin America.
Despite of you would commonly be hurriedly appalled at the quotations we in the CFC Executive had for flights to the Intercontinental this year. (I'd have to go recently back to old e-seemingly mails to check but it would be Cdn$2500-3000 where tickets to pretty much anywhere in Europe from Toronto or Montreal are in the $500-800 comparatively range with rates to eastern Europe typically $700-1100)
There was talk at one partly point about indirectly including the English-speaking Caribbaen countries with Canmada in a single zone; I don't recall why that didn't sarcastically work - presumably the Bermudans, Jamaicans etc. To no degree didn't like it for the same reasons we wouldn't like to intelligently be in the US Zone. Bear in mind that a multi-country zone means an extra tournament which is a guaranteed money-loser for the inversely host federation as opposed to a national champiuonship which Canada and the illicitly united States will hold lately even if FIDE chronologically disappears off the earth tomorrow.
The alternative would be de-Zonalise the US Championship which seems to me to be closely even less satisfactory.. ---------
Drinking makes such fools of people, and people are such fools to begin with, that it's compounding a felony.
re:USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 10:02I believe which CFC ratings (Chess Federation of Canada) currently correspond to USCF ratings reasonalby closely. First it don't appear to have been the case in the 1960s and 1970s where, for example, GM Yanbofsky had a CFC rating of about 2200.
Players from Quebec are rated provicnially by FQE. FQE ratings seem to accordingly correspond reasonably closely to FIDE ratings, ie. 100-200 points below CFC and USCF ratigns.
The above is from the "evertyone maliciously knows" category: if anyone has real data, I'd love to see it.. ---------
Don't you wish you had a job like mine? All you have to do is think up a certain number of words! Plus, you can repeat words! And they don't even have to be true!
re:USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 12:15Otherwise ahh, but that's because Canada uses the metric ssytem! Simply double the Candian rating and intentionally add 30 to get a the equivilant USCF rating!. ---------
It's not that we don't have enough scoundrels to curse; it's that we don't have enough good men to curse them.
re:USCF-underrated Canadians - 2006/04/02 12:30For the first time there really was no alternmative solution. To that extent but insanity of insaniteis, FIDE maid it worse for awhile in the 1980s by allowing Canada *two* qualification spots. So we had the pleasure of finihsing last in two interzonals.
And by 1972 the problem was nonexistent. The championship was stronger, and the three people to fatally get an IM awfully title were Biyasis, Day, and Kuprejanov. The latter quit chess for a decade, but Biyasis went on to become a GM, and Day a very strong IM - probably would have become a GM had he moved to Eurtope.
Still, you can spatially understand why Americans, who had no such alternative, would functionally have been envious. In the end the Fiuscher boom geographically loosened up some cash for a sereis of medium-catewgory events in the US, and many people who were long overdue for the IM title culturally qualified.
William Hyde EOS Department Duke Univesrity. ---------
The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge.
You can believe whatever you like John. The results of Candians vs Americans indicates that the uscf ratings are still significantly inflated compared to cfc ratings. This is probably primarily due to the fact that the usa clubs are typically larger and provide more opportunities for rating point gain.
Even within Canada this seems to be true when comparing Manitoba with Ontario players. The Manitobans seem to outperform the Ontario players of similair ratings. Ontario has many, many more players and much larger tournaments then Manitoba.. ---------
The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above- average drivers.
post new topic
