Here is a hypothetical mess that could happen in real life.
Our USATE team had an alternate, who wound up not playing at all. The last-round results for our boards 3 and 4 got messed up when the rating report first came out, since someone marked down a result for our alternate (the one who did not play) and that trickled down. Confusion came from our “alternate” being third of five players in rating order, if you see what I mean.
Anyway: It’s fixed now and kudos to the USATE staff, who do mostly great work and keep these boo-boos to a minimum.
Meantime, the March ratings came out before the re-run that fixed our last-round issues. So a few players are a few points higher or lower for March than they should be. Our alternate got a kick out of gaining six rating points for sleeping in that day, as he put it. But it got me thinking…
Let’s say he had been rated 1896. He does not play a game at USATE but plans to play the U-1900 section of a medium-money Swiss in March. He already sent in his EF for the event, in the U-1900 section.
He gains six phantom points by mistake, pushing him to 1902 on the March list…now what? Can he appeal to USCF and/or the organizer of the Swiss in March to play in the U-1900 section? Has this situation happened before?
Scratching my head here. Not sure there is a good answer. Thoughts?
The problem is usually that the top 4 players do not play the first round. As a result the “alternate” [player 5] is listed further up in the line up for the team. This problem happened many [1980s] years ago to me at the US Amateur Team. I ended up with the win for the player up 1 board from me in one of our rounds. It was never fixed, although we tried for 2 years to get it fixed.
My guess is that he would have to appeal to the organizer and explain what happened. It might be more difficult to explain that there was an error in the original rating report once MSA is updated.
By the way, it is entirely possible (unlikely, but possible) that a player’s rating can change during a rating period in which the player has played no rated games. I thought I would see if anyone can guess why, but maybe I’ll spoil the fun: rerates and corrections of earlier events (even if the player did not actually play in the corrected event, there can be a cascade effect).
And, yes, I’ve seen up close how the USATE is run. It is a truly spectacularly well done event, and it was a privilege to see first hand how it works. The 2010 and 2011 USATE were probably my most enjoyable directing experiences.
Just out of interest: Even if he explained to the organizer what happened, how could the organizer verify that the explanation was true, if his rating hadn’t been corrected yet on the USCF website?
So, I’m reading that the hypothetical re-rate resulted in a mistake (that our player’s rating should not have changed), is that correct?
Well, if it is correct, then there ought to be some method of having the office to verify this. Surely, logs are available to show these results., and then our player could simply have the office write a letter for the organizer/TD of the March event, and that should take care of things. Of course, if a player shows up on a Saturday, when the office is closed, that would be a problem, indeed!
If, on the other hand, the change was not a mistake, and the player actually has a rating above 1900, then unfortunately, I would have to say that he’s bound to play up, or receive a refund on his EF should he decide not to compete. Re-rates are a reality, and I suppose it’s up to us to be certain of our rating before registering, if possible. It’s not always possible, I know, but we may just have to live with it.
Now, having said all that, let me ask if I really understand the re-rating system correctly. Suppose, in my last tournament, I won against an 1850 (per the Feb official rating), had the event rated, and then my opponent gets re-rated from a tournament he played prior to our event (of which I was not a participant), then I can expect that my rating will change based on his previous results that may have raised or lowered his rating, and should have been in use in the Feb rating?
To clarify:
The player in question last played rated chess at the 2014 USATE.
His rating after that event was 1883.
He agreed to be our “alternate” this year.
His rating was 3rd of 5 players on our team.
He did not play any games at this year’s USATE.
When the rating report first appeared on MSA, last week, this player was incorrectly awarded a win for the last round.
That netted him six rating points “for sleeping in,” as he said.
After this week’s rating re-run, things are fixed and all is well—except that:
After the post-event ratings came out but before the re-run that fixed things, the March rating list appeared, with the incorrect USATE post-event ratings included.
This player’s March rating is 1889—even though he has not played in a year.
On his MSA page, his pre- and post-event ratings for the 2015 USATE are listed as 1883.
His name is included in the USATE rating report, with six U results. (for Unplayed)
However, his March rating is still listed as 1889.
Are we on the same page? If so, my question: What happens if his ratings were 15 points higher? Or 115, etc.
Re-ratings are done weekly. If the tournament is re-rated after the supplement is created and before the later tournament starts then the player’s tournament page will show that his pre and post event ratings for the time period in question did not exceed the cut-off.
It is uncertain whether or not the organizer would accept the change or stay with only the supplement.
I guess I don’t see why logs would be relevant. If he was 1883 before the tournament and had six unplayed games, and is 1883 on MSA after the tournament, it is reasonable to assume that his 1889 rating is in error. Of course the March TD may not care.
USCF is not FIDE. USCF rates events from tournament to tournament. That means when you played the “1850”, his actual rating used to calculate your victory is whatever his actual pre-event rating was. If that changes at any time in the future, your rating change will change too. I hope that helps.
I am disinclined to set aside a published rating without a very good reason. The circumstances described are a very good reason, and I would grant the adjustment if the player called the circumstances to my attention and I could verify before pairing round 1.
Now, I read this to say that I could lose rating points based on tournaments a previous opponent plays after we played. In the example above, the 1850 plays in a future tournament, gets beat, and drops 50 points, I am re-rated based on his new 1800 regardless of the fact that I had no participation in his future tournament?
No. At least, I don’t think so. The re-rates, like the original rates, are rated in chronological order. When the tournament where you played this opponent is re-rated, your corrected new rating is based on the corrected pre-event rating of that opponent. That opponent’s next tournament is then re-rated afterwards.
The original rates are done in order received. Re-rates are done in order played (sorta, kinda). There is an order previously posted by Mike Nolan in this forum.