Makes sense. It’s not quite so automated as the USCF ratings, which appeared almost instantly.
I’ve wondered why players with established FIDE ratings aren’t simply awarded those ratings at the beginning, rather than treating them as unrated when rating the event. They were paired according to their FIDE ratings. Their prize eligibility was determined by their FIDE ratings. Seems as if that would lead to more accurate pairings in future events.
What TDs do for prize/pairing purposes with FIDE rated players who have no USCF rating is not necessarily what the USCF rating system does with those players. (The rating system doesn’t treat them as unrated, it gives them an adjusted USCF rating from their FIDE rating, based on either 5 or 10 games. See the rating formula for details.)
The US Open may be one of the most difficult tournaments to FIDE rate.
Only those games that were played at a FIDE rateable time controls can be submitted for FIDE rating. Because of the different schedules / time controls, some players may have all 9 of their games submitted for FIDE rating, while many have to have a few or even most of their games removed from the FIDE report.
Well, now I have two FIDE existences: As “Mike Murray” the Canadian, and “Michael A. Murray” the American. This schizoid condition is mildly uncomfortable. I clearly informed the folks in Vancouver that the guys in Victoria snagged me first, and the name under which I was registered. Oh, well. Helps relieve the international fish shortage, I suppose. I might challenge myself to a match.
The 2012 US Open was included in the September FIDE Rating List, which was posted by FIDE a few hours ago.