New rating system for the Bristol league?

We now know that the ECF may switch the grading system from a three digit grade to a more modern Fide ELO style four digit rating system from January 2020.

I have compiled a rating chart that converts ECF grade to Elo for the benefit of those that may wish to know what their new rating would be if it were implicated at this time.

It’s based on ratings starting at 100 ECF and rising 10 ECF points at a time to 220.

I hope it helps some to have an idea of what these new ratings might be for players in the Bristol & District Chess League that are not fully understanding of the difference between the two:


100 – 1450

110 – 1525

120 – 1600

130 – 1675

140 – 1740

150 – 1825

160 – 1900

170 – 1975

180 – 2050

190 – 2125

200 – 2200

210 – 2275

220 – 2340

BCT: The details of the proposal are here:

Here at the BCT we are quite confused about all this K-factor and RO and algorithms going on and have some simple questions for the Bristol league:

  • What are the pros and cons for you as a club player of using ECF and FIDE ELO ratings?
  • Is it a pain for anyone using both? (e.g. in Bristol FIDE rated congresses?)
  • For those that play online chess, how does your ECF grade compare with your unofficial ELO rating online?



Bob is a regular Bristol league and tournament player

One thought on “New rating system for the Bristol league?”

  1. I read with interest Bob Radford’s and the BCT’s comments on the ECF’s proposals for using FIDE ratings. I see from the link to the ECF proposals that these are headed “Monthly grading proposal”. The change to monthly grading seems to be taken for granted already, while the switch from ECF to ELO grading is explained (or not, depending on your point of view!) in great detail.
    So, really there are two separate issues: monthly grading and the switch to ELO.

    I suppose that changing from ECF to ELO is “progress” and I can’t get too excited about it either way from a personal point of view. Of greater concern seems to me to be how the webmasters will cope with it. To quote the BCT “Here at the BCT we are quite confused about all this K-factor and RO and algorithms going on”

    But the introduction of monthly grading opens an enormous can of worms. Let’s face it we all play league chess for the enjoyment, fun and competitive spirit that the league gives us. And I suggest we look out for the results and league tables on Chessit in much the same way that we check the football results in the Sunday paper or on the internet. So just what would monthly grading mean to us?

    First, what does it mean to the individual player? I suggest that anyone who is desperately keen to know how his/her grade is progressing from game to game is able to do this quite easily on the back of an envelope or, if they are so inclined, on a simple computer spreadsheet. And indeed they probably already do! How many will feel the necessity to log on to an ECF file to see their monthly grade? Nice to have, maybe, but hardly essential for most players. We have around 320 players in the league, of whom 60-ish play regularly in weekend congresses which means that over 70% only play league chess. They can already see their grade not monthly, but weekly, on Chessit, so the ECF’s publishing of monthly updates will add nothing of great value for them. And, after all, “they”, the silent majority, are the League.

    I am even more concerned about what it will mean to the Chessit results in particular. I want Chessit to be able to continue as at present. I do not want our league’s administrators to be caught up with feeding monthly data to the ECF if this will in any way affect the excellent reporting of results that we currently enjoy. To be blunt, I would rather make no change to monthly grading if this could adversely impact our league’s existing reporting of results and updating of tables.

    The Chessit reporting of results is actually quite sophisticated in the way that it handles not only match scores and updating of tables but also detailed club statistics including grading thresholds and play ups and downs. We are very lucky to have all this and I very much doubt whether the ECF have really thought it through properly and understand the problems they may be causing bigger leagues like ours. They state in their proposal that “At least in the early stages, there should be tolerance of delayed reporting, particularly for leagues and internal club results.” I wonder if this could be the thin end of the wedge.

    If push came to shove and the ECF try to make the League supply monthly results, I would hope we would have the strength to stand up to them and tell them to wait for the six monthly updates which have been perfectly adequate up to now. As they say in the classics “If it ain’t broke, don’t’ try to fix it.”

    Ian Pickup

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: