Have I Been Sandbagging for Nine Years. Help?!

Your rating is probably around 1000 points lower than it should be.

Most tournaments cap the amount of money you can win as a provisional or unrated player. Also th cash prizes for low rating events such as U1200 typically have small prizes -- 300-500 at most unless you are playing in a national tournament. That will cover your hotel, food and entry fee (possibly your transportation if you live close by). However, you won't be netting a huge windfall. If you end up splitting first or worse not placing, you will end up with a net financial loss. Playing chess is simply not a great way to make money. You should enter a tournament because you enjoy playing competitively and because you want to make money.

BTW if you do end up winning all your games, your rating is likely to be adjusted to higher than 1200. So you probably could not repeat your feat even if you do end up winning. You should also be aware that in lower ratings sections, ther are often many severely under-rated kids. In my experience, 10 percent or more of the entrants likely have a playing strength above the ratings cap. So you might not be the strongest in the field.

Without offending anyone...the OP is sandbagging.He clearly knows his old rating doesn't reflect his current strength and that said present strength is well in excess of 1200;the idea of him competeing in the U1200 division isn't just laughable,it's unethical.That unplesantness aside,I'd advise annotating your own games and comparing them to shredder's analysis;ignore evaluations of a positional nature and concentrate on tactical errors of only a few ply.Furthermore,do EASY tactical puzzles,1-3 ply,this is what is going to primarily decide all sub-1500 games.

I actually spoke to the TD yesterday and was extremely candid with what I was intending on doing and he said to go for it... He also said that being a coffee house player I might run into mental fatigue or nerves in the later rounds of the tourney and to not think it'll be all milk and cookies.

He also told me that even people who reach 2300 spend more on travel and the like than they'll make so this is one of the best times to make any money while I improve.

@badger_song I was actually planning on doing 3-5 hours of the tactics trainer today just to get my head in the mood to search constantly before tomorrow comes. Now, is what I'm doing in poor taste? Maybe, but that's assuming there won't be anyone severely underrated there as well. You never know, protect yourself at all times right?

@pt22064 I used a ratings calculator and it would be extremely unlikely that my rating will surpass 1200 in this tourname.

I spent last night practicing standard time controls, OTB with a friend of mine that's nearly an 1800 and he suggested that after this tournament I may want to hold off on standard time control tournaments (only playing quick-rated tournaments) until a bigger tournament like the World Open where the prize fund makes the u1200 section really pay off.

I really don't think it's delusional to strategize what tournaments I play, it's no different than having good table selection while playing live cash poker. Just because everyone else isn't doing it doesn't necessarily mean my choices are unethical.

there's no money in chess......if you want money, play poker.

Intrepid,if you were candid with the TD and he ok'd your plan,then I stand corrected.You have behaved ethically and the onus is on the TD.Good luck in the tourney.

Sandbagging is where you deliberately throw games to lower your rating.  

You may want to look at what you can win in the million dollar chess torunament.  The problem with that tournament is in the states (at least in this state of illinois) the chess "season" pretty much runs november until march.  So you will be running into quite a few scholastic kids who haven't played a rated game yet this season but were probably improving like crazy leading up to october with no rated games boosting their rating.  

I have done a few of those tournaments because its fun to play with some money on the line (even though I didn't win any).  

There is a bit of a misunderstanding here;sandbagging,in chess,is any deliberate misrepresentation of one's chess skills ,usually for the purpose of getting favorable game-pairings or otherwise gaining a competitive edge.Deliberately lowering one's rating is just a common  example of sandbagging,the point being to qualifying for an easier pool to compete against.

Blitz and standard time games are two completely different skill sets. Blitz is more based on instinct, and standard time gives the chance to thuroughly consider the options on the board. Standard time chess is like baseball, and blitz is more like dodgeball.The change in gear from online to standard time will be just as drastic. If you are going to be changing from online to standard time games, review previous games and play them over to use repitition to sharpen tactical vision.

Badger_Song

Where are you getting this?  I wonder if the USCF has posted some jarbled rules on this or something.  

In an earlier post you say the op would be unethical in playing in the under 1200.  Are you suggesting he would be deliberately misrepresenting something?  He in fact has the USCF rating he would indicate.  If he didn't sandbag any games to get that rating then he would not be deliberately misrepresenting anything.   

If he were to indicate he had a higher USCF rating, than what he does, he would be deliberately misrepresenting something.   How much ratings represent actual strength is USCF's and the tournament organizers problem not his.  

If you were to ask just about anyone in that million dollar tournament if they believed they play chess stronger than their current USCF rating the majority would (if they were honest) say yes.   If they ask that question of everyone then fine those who know better would be deliberately misrepresenting something.  But the organizers wont ask that question because they know just about everyone is believing they play better than their rating and it would discourage participation.  At least it would discourage participation of honest people.    

Nicefork,if you were to inquire about "sandbagging"  to the USCF you would get a similar response.I  think you misunderstand what sandbagging actually is;if the OP were to  enter a U1200 tourney at his present strength,while claiming his old USCF rating were still acurate,he would be guilty of sandbagging.However,he has already informed the TD of his situation and the TD has ok'd him for the U1200 divison so by definition he is not sandbagging.The USCF encourages players who have not participated in sanctioned,rated,games for prolonged periods to contact the TD.The implication is clear,if a player deliberately misrepresents  their playing strength in order to gain an advantage they can get the boot.The swiss pairing sytem is based upon recent elo ratings and there is an assumption of a slight positive or negative lag effect.However,a USCF rating that is almost a decade old would certainly draw scrutiny,especially if said player had been playing chess without interuption in the interim.The USCF does not care if one plays in higher divisons than their ability would indicate,the opposite is most definately not true.

For purposes of tournaments, your rating is your rating and you are allowed to play in any section that meets that. In fact, it is your published rating that matters and if you play in an event, go over 1200 and you enter another event before your new rating is official, then you can still play in the U1200 section.

Now, if your rating is a lot higher the TD might want you to play in the higher class but unless pre-tournament publication states ratings other than the published rating can be used, then you get to use the published rating. I will have to look at the rules later, to see if the TD can force you into a higher section or not ... though I don't think that is the case.

I used to think I was around a 1500 rated, back in the day, and when I started back into chess, with a 1183 (2 game) provisional rating, I found out that I wasn't near that skill level. I played too fast, overlooked simple things, etc and thus my thoughts of my chess skill were off and my post tourney ratings showed that.

@ the OP, the ratings calculations for provisional games are not completely the same as they are once you have an established one, so it is still possible that you could end up with a larger rating increase than you think if you win all your games (it also depends on the ratings of your opponents).

Martin,the TD has very wide latitude  in the interpretation of USCF rules.The TD can rule that a player does not qualify to "play down" a division.If the player doesn't like that he can appeal AFTER the tourney.A class-level player is typically stuck with a TD ruling at a tourney.

Use the tactical trainer.  I find it helpful.

Thanks...

I did that for about two hours today. Now I'm at a local chess club during a monthly tourney, while they're playing each other I'm playing Shredder set to 2050. I'm adjusting well...

Ramjet1957 wrote:

Use the tactical trainer.  I find it helpful.

If you're playing in a major tournament, you may find the competition tougher than you imagine.  There will be several younger players whose ratings have not caught up with their ability.  Their published rating (the one used for the tournament) lags their actual rating (I've lost to players rated under 1200 whose published ratings two months later were over 1500).  

If it's a local tournament, who knows what the competition will be like.

Jeeze... I've been telling people on this site for MONTHS that the way to avoid hasty moves in OTB tournaments is to SIT ON YOUR HANDS!

... glad to find someone who agrees with me on this point.

I emu,I remember you  from the Sombody-Jaglavak thread!Good advice.

I am a TD and I don't know where you get/got the idea that there is "very wide latitude in the interpretation of USCF rules." The rules are pretty straightforward, for the most part, and shouldn't be disregarded without justification; unless a TD wants to be open to possible sanctions.

While a TD can modify many of the rules, if they are done in pre-tournament publicity, anything that is not changed in advanced is expected to match standard regulations. That includes pairing methods and class eligibility.A player with a published rating is not considered "playing down" if they may have improved since their last rating was published.

Rule 28E does allow a TD to assign a rating to a player for a reasonable cause; would an online rating and a player's estimation of their strength be reasonable reason to do that? Maybe.

Though, if a player is assigned a higher rating and doesn't perform at that level, I would think the player would have grounds for a complaint against the TD.

You are right though, at a tournament, the player has little recourse to what a TD decides. That said, unless I knew for sure that a player was stronger than their published rating (or next published rating), then I would allow them to qualify for whatever section their rating entitles them to. That isn't unethical, for the player or TD. The only way I would assign the higher rating is if I knew for a fact they had good results against higher rated players (e.g. through club play).

Just because someone says they are a 1500 rated player (substitue 1500 with whatever value you want), doesn't mean they are that strong. Playing in a tournament setting is a lot different than playing casually and online.