| Ange1o DePa1ma 2006-11-19, 9:06 pm |
| "Mike Murray" <mikemurray@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:kbb2k21c5domieq15ah0tcqlibme3m75nd@4ax.com...
quote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:28:38 -0400, "Ange1o DePa1ma"
> <angelodpnospam@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Gotta agree with Angelo on this. For example, in the Montana Open
> this year, one player rated 839 scored 2-3, beating players rated
> 1477 and 1540).
>
> Going to the USCF web site and searching for tournaments "under 1000"
> brings up a few hits. People don't usually enter tournaments as soon
> as they learn how the pieces move.
>
> It seems to me that ratings of roughly 1000 and below are unstable and
> relatively untrustworthy because it doesn't take that much study and
> practice to improve enough to gain hundreds of rating points. Think
> about going from 1000 to 1400 versus going from 1900 to 2300.
Mike is right about instability of ratings below 1000. I failed to mention
that my next rating after 969 was 1530, earned after playing in a few
tournaments in mid-late 1968.
We've had a bunch of 900-1300 players come through our club. I assure you
they know MUCH more than simply how to move the pieces. My two daughters
know little more than how the pieces move, and their ratings are in the 500s
I believe.
|