CCA Minimum Ratings - Chess Forums

TheAdultProdigy

Jun 20, 2015

0

#1

I recently came across a list of minimum ratings that the Continental Chess Association gives players who have "exceptional" results, presumably to avoid sandbaggers. Is there a method by which they determine these ratings? I've looked at a couple of the players with CCA minimum ratings (disqualifying them from top prize money in CCA tournaments), but I couldn't determine how they assign the ratings. I noticed that one player seems to only ever do well in CCA tournaments, which was actually kind of funny: up 150 pts in a CCA tourn, down 100 pts in a local tourn; up 100 pts at a CCA tourn, down to the rating floor after two local tourns. That's not obvious, is it?

Martin_Stahl

Jun 22, 2015

0

#2

Milliern wrote:

I recently came across a list of minimum ratings that the Continental Chess Association gives players who have "exceptional" results, presumably to avoid sandbaggers. Is there a method by which they determine these ratings? I've looked at a couple of the players with CCA minimum ratings (disqualifying them from top prize money in CCA tournaments), but I couldn't determine how they assign the ratings. I noticed that one player seems to only ever do well in CCA tournaments, which was actually kind of funny: up 150 pts in a CCA tourn, down 100 pts in a local tourn; up 100 pts at a CCA tourn, down to the rating floor after two local tourns. That's not obvious, is it?

According to their page, they usually base it on outstanding performances in a class tournament. My guess is that if someone wins a class tourney they automatically make the minimum rating at least the top rating for the class if their rating isn't already higher than that.

TheAdultProdigy

Jun 22, 2015

0

#3

Martin_Stahl wrote:

Milliern wrote:

I recently came across a list of minimum ratings that the Continental Chess Association gives players who have "exceptional" results, presumably to avoid sandbaggers. Is there a method by which they determine these ratings? I've looked at a couple of the players with CCA minimum ratings (disqualifying them from top prize money in CCA tournaments), but I couldn't determine how they assign the ratings. I noticed that one player seems to only ever do well in CCA tournaments, which was actually kind of funny: up 150 pts in a CCA tourn, down 100 pts in a local tourn; up 100 pts at a CCA tourn, down to the rating floor after two local tourns. That's not obvious, is it?

According to their page, they usually base it on outstanding performances in a class tournament. My guess is that if someone wins a class tourney they automatically make the minimum rating at least the top rating for the class if their rating isn't already higher than that.

Yeah, that was my guess, but I also think it doesn't matter if their rating is higher than the class/rating group that they won. I think they are more concerned with floors. I saw a name on the list, and that person went well about the class rating, then plummeted to his floor.

Martin_Stahl

Jun 22, 2015

0

#4

Yeah, it probably also has something to do with floors but it is possible that they might give a minimum to someone that wasn't at their floor but won a class section. For example, a 1600 (with a 1400 floor) that wins a Class B section but doesn't have their actual rating go over 1800 (though probably gets a 1700 floor).

That is just speculation on my part though.

idoun

Sep 16, 2018

0

#5

I looked at several of these and it is not at all clear how they do it. There is 1 player who has a rating floor of 2000 but is rated <1200 and hasn't defeated any strong players. Did have a provisional rating. But some players are not provisional. Found 1 who finished 1990 after a CCA and they made a floor of 2000.

I do not agree with not having a transparent system. Eg, all they need to do is set the rating as the max it has ever been. That will prevent players from throwing games to lower their rating, and will prevent someone from winning a major class tournament more than once.

Players are going to be wondering how their play during a tournament is going to affect this minimum rating, which is not going to lead to good performances.

TheAdultProdigy

Sep 16, 2018

0

#6

idoun wrote:

I looked at several of these and it is not at all clear how they do it. There is 1 player who has a rating floor of 2000 but is rated <1200 and hasn't defeated any strong players. Did have a provisional rating. But some players are not provisional. Found 1 who finished 1990 after a CCA and they made a floor of 2000.

I do not agree with not having a transparent system. Eg, all they need to do is set the rating as the max it has ever been. That will prevent players from throwing games to lower their rating, and will prevent someone from winning a major class tournament more than once.

Players are going to be wondering how their play during a tournament is going to affect this minimum rating, which is not going to lead to good performances.

They do it with all sorts of means, from other federation ratings, performance ratings, and so forth.

TheAdultProdigy

Sep 16, 2018

0

#7

idoun wrote:

I looked at several of these and it is not at all clear how they do it. There is 1 player who has a rating floor of 2000 but is rated <1200 and hasn't defeated any strong players. Did have a provisional rating. But some players are not provisional. Found 1 who finished 1990 after a CCA and they made a floor of 2000.

Who is the example?

idoun

Sep 16, 2018

0

#8

Milliern wrote:

idoun wrote:

I looked at several of these and it is not at all clear how they do it. There is 1 player who has a rating floor of 2000 but is rated <1200 and hasn't defeated any strong players. Did have a provisional rating. But some players are not provisional. Found 1 who finished 1990 after a CCA and they made a floor of 2000.

I do not agree with not having a transparent system. Eg, all they need to do is set the rating as the max it has ever been. That will prevent players from throwing games to lower their rating, and will prevent someone from winning a major class tournament more than once.

Players are going to be wondering how their play during a tournament is going to affect this minimum rating, which is not going to lead to good performances.

They do it with all sorts of means, from other federation ratings, performance ratings, and so forth.

I am not sure what you mean, they said that the CCA minimum rating was usually based on an outstanding class performance, which will be similar to a performance rating. Are you saying the CCA minimum rating is also based on other federation ratings? I still say that they should publish the criteria they use so that it is transparent.

Eg, maybe I would avoid playing in a blitz tournament, because in case I have a particularly good day, I could be made ineligible for some CCA standard time-control tournaments?

idoun

Sep 16, 2018

0

#9

Milliern wrote:

idoun wrote:

I looked at several of these and it is not at all clear how they do it. There is 1 player who has a rating floor of 2000 but is rated <1200 and hasn't defeated any strong players. Did have a provisional rating. But some players are not provisional. Found 1 who finished 1990 after a CCA and they made a floor of 2000.

Who is the example?

http://www.uschess.org/assets/msa_joomla/MbrDtlMain.php?12943914

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?14684907

The last one, based on the 8/15 date, did not break 2000 in a CCA tournament. So they either bumped the player up to 2000 or they looked at a non-CCA tournament (the action one next), and then used that rating.