I’m new to OTB tournaments, I’ve played in one Quick and one Blitz. My Quick shows up on both the new and old sites. My Blitz shows up on Muir in the tournament listings, and in the graph, but not in the box in the upper left.
Is this just teething issues with the transition to Muir or do I need to do something. My ID number is 30242227.
Thanks!
Unfortunately the event 2nd Pizza and Blitz night was not early enough to be part of the November Supplement. November Supplement was processed On October 15, this event was on October 27.
Since this event took place after October 15 the rating from the event will not show as your official supplement rating until December 1, 2025
If you do not see your blitz rating updated by December 5, 2025 I would then recommend reaching out to ratingsmgr@uschess.org to inquire if something more serious may be going on.
Hopefully this all makes sense.
Official ratings are only updated once a month on the 1st of the month. and events that happen later in the month are not usually posted until 5-6 weeks later.
If you click on the ratings table tab, it will show both ratings and which supplement they showed up in.
It’s still messed up somehow. Check out my listing today. I see my Blitz rating but not my rapid. My guess is that the new system still has some bugs.
The display isn’t the best here, but in the download files I see both ratings for you. I can also see both of your ratings actually on the chart, just not in the ratings block at the top.
Yup, I see them there also. The missing ratings block is weird though. Probably just a bug in the software.
As you can see from the Anthony Booth issue in another thread, there are a lot of historical data glitches, and that complicates the data transfer and the programming logic in MUIR. Both of those tasks expect to see accurate consistent data, and when it isn’t they can get confused.
The proper procedure is probably to first figure out what all the data should be, and then once that’s in order figure out how to properly display it.
We shouldn’t be tweaking the display logic to handle issues that are best resolved by correcting the data itself. Once the data is correct, displaying it properly should be more straight-forward.
I do think, however, that my idea for a top-line summary of ‘latest’ published ratings should go on the work list, even if it isn’t considered in-scope for the original contract. But that’s a decision made higher up the pyramid.
This seems fairly straightforward though, and I agree that it’s a data issue. However it’s fairly weird to have a data issue for tournaments no earlier than October 2025. If you look at what’s getting pulled for the top display, there’s just no current rating included for Quick (contrast with the current rating listed for Blitz):
{
"fideId": "0",
"gender": "Male",
"lastChangedDate": "2025-11-20",
"ratings": [
{
"ratingSystem": "R",
"gamesPlayed": 0,
"isProvisional": true
},
{
"ratingSystem": "Q",
"gamesPlayed": 4,
"isProvisional": true,
"floor": 100
},
{
"rating": 448,
"ratingSystem": "B",
"gamesPlayed": 11,
"isProvisional": true,
"floor": 109
},
{
"ratingSystem": "OR",
"gamesPlayed": 0,
"isProvisional": true
},
{
"ratingSystem": "OQ",
"gamesPlayed": 0,
"isProvisional": true
},
{
"ratingSystem": "OB",
"gamesPlayed": 0,
"isProvisional": true
}
],
"id": "30242227",
"firstName": "Paul",
"lastName": "Cezanne",
"stateRep": "NH",
"jurisdiction": "NH",
"expirationDate": "2026-09-30",
"status": "Active"
}
https://ratings-api.uschess.org/api/v1/members/30242227
Whereas in the supplements list the Quick rating does show up in the October 2025 supplement:
{
"items": [
{
"ratingSupplementDate": "2025-12-01",
"ratings": [
{
"rs": "R"
},
{
"rs": "Q"
},
{
"rs": "B",
"v": 448,
"pgc": 11
},
{
"rs": "OR"
},
{
"rs": "OQ"
},
{
"rs": "OB"
}
]
},
{
"ratingSupplementDate": "2025-10-01",
"ratings": [
{
"rs": "R"
},
{
"rs": "Q",
"v": 474,
"pgc": 4
},
{
"rs": "B"
},
{
"rs": "OR"
},
{
"rs": "OQ"
},
{
"rs": "OB"
}
]
}
],
"offset": 0,
"pageSize": 2,
"hasPreviousPage": false,
"hasNextPage": false
}
I have found one case (so far) of a player who SHOULD have had a November 2025 supplement record because that player was active that month though the integer-based rating did not change. There could easily be other examples of this on both the legacy system and on MUIR.
This isn’t an issue of having a particular supplement record, just that the top-line “RATINGS” display should include the live (or at least the most recent published month) rating of that player, whether active or not. That is, if Paul showed up to a quick tournament he should have a quick rating of 474/4, not unrated, which is not reflected here at the top level (it is so reflected in the allratings file).
The Rating Table tab won’t show most-recent rating (that’s a policy decision), but IMHO it should show last published, although that SHOULD already be what’s in the boxes above that, so this would basically be repeating information already on screen. (And that is out of scope for the current contract, so it won’t happen until it gets approved as an add-on.)
I think that should be in-scope - there’s no reason that only a rating with activity in the last month should show in the boxes. The result of https://ratings-api.uschess.org/api/v1/members/30242227 is what’s being displayed in the boxes, and it has the 4 games number in it for Quick (and the 100 floor), just not the 474.
I know they’re working on updating the database so what shows up in the boxes is correct and current. That’s a corrections issue so it is in scope.
Adding that same information to the ratings table tab is a UI change so it is considered out of scope. (I didn’t write the contract, I’m just telling you how I’m told it is being interpreted.)
Sounds good; I misunderstood your response regarding the Ratings Table tab. The boxes being correct and current was the only thing I was concerned about there.
