Appointing the TORNELO as the Rating Officier? - OzChess

**Amir Karibasic** · 03-25-2011, 07:07 AM

Australian Chess Federation officials do not accept the Tornelo to be used for pairings and Live games...

however...

...The TORNELO could be the new Rating Officier.....

Please give us an idea on how should we vote and promote the TORNELO , as the rating officer which would secure all chess players data visibilty.

Let us know what you think?

**Scott Colliver** · 03-25-2011, 09:40 AM

This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer.
Scott

**Igor Goldenberg** · 03-25-2011, 10:34 AM

Rating officer (ACF) uses a program. The question is which program is better, not who should be a rating officer (even though they could be interconnected).

**antichrist** · 03-25-2011, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer.
Scott

God is the ultimate ratings officer

**Scott Colliver** · 03-25-2011, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Igor Goldenberg

Rating officer (ACF) uses a program. The question is which program is better, not who should be a rating officer (even though they could be interconnected).

Tornelo could present ratings a bit more attractively, that is true but that is only an extremely minor issue as far as I am concerned. I am quite happy to read my rating in a text file when the ratings are released. A graph of my previous ratings would be slightly interesting but not of any real benefit to me. However I think people a dreaming if they think the ACF is going to adopt Tornelo as a way of presenting it ratings it is just not going to happen.
Scott

**Just2Good** · 03-25-2011, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

However I think people a dreaming if they think the ACF is going to adopt Tornelo as a way of presenting it ratings it is just not going to happen.
Scott

While it is no secret that the ACF is hostile to Tornelo and you are correct that they would not adopt it, I am curious to know whether you would be in favour of the ACF adopting it as a way of presenting ratings?

**Scott Colliver** · 03-25-2011, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by Just2Good

While it is no secret that the ACF is hostile to Tornelo and you are correct that they would not adopt it, I am curious to know whether you would be in favour of the ACF adopting it as a way of presenting ratings?

I don't know, for me improved presentation is not needed, it would be an extra thing but not a necessary thing. I think Bill does an excellent job, it was not too long ago that FIDE could not get their rating lists out on time, this has never been a problem with the ACF under Bill.
I think that the ACF needs to have full control over the software that it uses. At the moment it seems to rely on SP a program that it does not control and it is becoming an issue. SP is quickly becoming out of date and the move to sm5 and perhaps other pairing programs appears to be inevitable. I have no way of knowing what the actual program that does the ratings calculations is and how easy it would be to adapt to do calculations off of other ways of presenting rules to be rated. It would be good if it could rate tournaments that are paired using a range of programs including sm5. This could be importing from text files, although I don't even know whether sm5 exports text files.
To go down the route of relying on Tornelo, a program that is owned by a businessman who has had differences with the ACF seems risky. What if it is suddenly not there? This does not have to be because David does something wrong, or means for it not to be there.
It is not a simple decision and I would want to look at all the options in more detail.
What can the current ACF rating system actually do?
What can Tornelo do?
What is David willing to implement in Tornelo to meet the ACF requirements? What files can sm5 produce that could be used to rate tournaments?
When I had these answers I would be in a lot better position to make a decision. I certainly don't think it is as simple as saying Tornelo looks great, Tornelo is great, lets use it, but after a thorough examination it might be worth using.
Scott

**Amir Karibasic** · 03-25-2011, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer.
Scott

It seems you didn't notice that I used it in a metaphorical form, next time I'll make it easier for you to understand.

**ChessGuru** · 03-25-2011, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

Tornelo could present ratings a bit more attractively, that is true but that is only an extremely minor issue as far as I am concerned.

I think you underestimate the importance of attractive design and presentation.

Take a look at the real world and presentation is EVERYTHING. Movie stars, politicians, Apple everything, hotels, all the most successful products are the most attractive ones.... improve the look of ratings and you'll increase participation by 10%. Maybe not logical, maybe not sensible...but it's a fact.

**ChessGuru** · 03-25-2011, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

I think that the ACF needs to have full control over the software that it uses.

Like Word and MYOB? Or G-mail? Or like SM5? Unless the ACF wants to spend a couple hundred grand developing software - which they won't really "control" anyway, because any changes would cost bucks.

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

It would be good if it could rate tournaments that are paired using a range of programs including sm5.

Actually Tornelo can do this already.

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

To go down the route of relying on Tornelo, a program that is owned by a businessman who has had differences with the ACF seems risky. What if it is suddenly not there?

It could be a good way of reconciling differences?

If it's "suddenly" not there then the same thing happens as if Bill Gletsos is "suddenly" not there - or SM or SP. You find something else.

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

It is not a simple decision and I would want to look at all the options in more detail.

At the moment the ACF is trying to ban your ability to look at all the options. Nobody's asking for a decision now...all we want is for the ACF to give tournament organisers the opportunity to consider all the options.

What can the current ACF rating system actually do?

Um, we see it every few months....no surprises.

What can Tornelo do?

That's what we'd like to find out....the ACF should be supportive of asking this question. At the moment the ACF isn't even prepared to ask that question.

What is David willing to implement in Tornelo to meet the ACF requirements?

Whatever it takes.

What files can sm5 produce that could be used to rate tournaments?

The advantage of Tornelo is not so much that it can rate tournaments...it is a TIME SAVER.

Tornelo integrates; tournament entries, pairings, results publication and games -- and produces ratings.

It means you use one process rather than 5.

...but after a thorough examination it might be worth using.
Scott

I am thrilled that you feel this way!

Can you please write to the ACF and tell them that you'd like to see a thorough examination.

**Iconoclast** · 03-25-2011, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer.
Scott

A set of lights and a camera can be a traffic cop.

**Scott Colliver** · 03-25-2011, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by ChessGuru

Like Word and MYOB? Or G-mail? Or like SM5? Unless the ACF wants to spend a couple hundred grand developing software - which they won't really "control" anyway, because any changes would cost bucks.

Actually Tornelo can do this already.

It could be a good way of reconciling differences?

If it's "suddenly" not there then the same thing happens as if Bill Gletsos is "suddenly" not there - or SM or SP. You find something else.

At the moment the ACF is trying to ban your ability to look at all the options. Nobody's asking for a decision now...all we want is for the ACF to give tournament organisers the opportunity to consider all the options.

Um, we see it every few months....no surprises.

That's what we'd like to find out....the ACF should be supportive of asking this question. At the moment the ACF isn't even prepared to ask that question.

Whatever it takes.

The advantage of Tornelo is not so much that it can rate tournaments...it is a TIME SAVER.

Tornelo integrates; tournament entries, pairings, results publication and games -- and produces ratings.

It means you use one process rather than 5.

I am thrilled that you feel this way!

Can you please write to the ACF and tell them that you'd like to see a thorough examination.

David, I am sure a lot of the things you say are true of the potential of the program.
It is worth noting that the ACF has two ratings officers so if one is not there for some reason then there is still someone there who knows what is going on. Also it would rely on one of your servers still being in operation.
As far as the ACF system goes, when I asked "What can the ACF system do?" I did not mean what does it produce. Sorry for the confusion, but I meant what software does it use? Is there custom made software? Do they use a spreadsheet, database etc?
The ACF probably has answers to alot of what I am asking and maybe they had information to make a decision. I am not really interested in doing such an examination myself. I guess I will get to learn alot more about Tornelo at Doeberl. I probably should by myself a copy of Swiss Manager and Swiss Master so I can get familar with those programs but really can not justify the cost at the moment as my work situation is not the greatest.
Tournament Director is one of the other FIDE approved pairing programs and it is a program that has been written specifically to be used in tournaments in Britain and to integrate with their rating system. Something like that would be brilliant. It is a real pity that there was a falling out between the ACF and the SP developer and it could not have been updated.
Scott

**Scott Colliver** · 03-25-2011, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

A set of lights and a camera can be a traffic cop.

No, I don't think so.

**Iconoclast** · 03-25-2011, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Colliver

No, I don't think so.

Scotty Scotty Scooottyyyyyyy. Maaaaaaate. You need to get your inner aspie under control. Most of what is posted here is analogous - not literal.

**Kings of chess** · 03-26-2011, 06:51 PM

We do have the following answers:
1. TORNELO needs to improve the pairing system
2. TORNELO should not use mobile phones ( My opinion is still IPAD's and Tabloids are way to go, it just needs to be verifyed by the FIDE (Monroi did it the same way), the price of simple tabloids will depreciate within 1-2 Years)

But we do not have an exact answer:

Why can we not use the TORNELO for rating purposes?

Does the TORNELO need to be developed in a better way, as it is not, as accurate as it should be?

For Scott as a Player, he is not interested in the graphical details, but if his arbitrage information would appear on the TORNELO; tournaments, title, expertise, public reference than he would be interested in the TORNELO.

Therefore I think that the TORNELO could also include Arbiter information.

Also it would be good for all players to include their success in the tournament and championships, their coach information or chess school.

Practicly, The Tornelo must be verified by FIDE first - other way ACF will not accept it- but how long before that happens?

03-25-2011, 07:07 AM	#1 (permalink)
Amir Karibasic Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Gold Coast Posts: 194	Appointing the TORNELO as the Rating Officier? Australian Chess Federation officials do not accept the Tornelo to be used for pairings and Live games... however... ...The TORNELO could be the new Rating Officier..... Please give us an idea on how should we vote and promote the TORNELO , as the rating officer which would secure all chess players data visibilty. Let us know what you think? __________________ . Visit my chess shop! Last edited by Amir Karibasic : 03-25-2011 at 07:51 AM

03-25-2011, 10:34 AM	#3 (permalink)
Igor Goldenberg Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Melbourne Posts: 331	Rating officer (ACF) uses a program. The question is which program is better, not who should be a rating officer (even though they could be interconnected). __________________ For private coaching email IgorGoldenberg@bluebottle.com Computer tells you what to play, a good coach explains why. The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. H. L. Mencken

03-25-2011, 10:45 AM	#4 (permalink)
antichrist Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Byron Bay, NSW Posts: 2,821	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer. Scott God is the ultimate ratings officer

03-25-2011, 11:17 AM	#5 (permalink)
Scott Colliver Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 88	Originally Posted by Igor Goldenberg Rating officer (ACF) uses a program. The question is which program is better, not who should be a rating officer (even though they could be interconnected). Tornelo could present ratings a bit more attractively, that is true but that is only an extremely minor issue as far as I am concerned. I am quite happy to read my rating in a text file when the ratings are released. A graph of my previous ratings would be slightly interesting but not of any real benefit to me. However I think people a dreaming if they think the ACF is going to adopt Tornelo as a way of presenting it ratings it is just not going to happen. Scott

03-25-2011, 11:50 AM	#6 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver However I think people a dreaming if they think the ACF is going to adopt Tornelo as a way of presenting it ratings it is just not going to happen. Scott While it is no secret that the ACF is hostile to Tornelo and you are correct that they would not adopt it, I am curious to know whether you would be in favour of the ACF adopting it as a way of presenting ratings? __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

03-25-2011, 09:40 AM	#2 (permalink)
Scott Colliver Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 88	This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer. Scott

03-25-2011, 12:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
Scott Colliver Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 88	Originally Posted by Just2Good While it is no secret that the ACF is hostile to Tornelo and you are correct that they would not adopt it, I am curious to know whether you would be in favour of the ACF adopting it as a way of presenting ratings? I don't know, for me improved presentation is not needed, it would be an extra thing but not a necessary thing. I think Bill does an excellent job, it was not too long ago that FIDE could not get their rating lists out on time, this has never been a problem with the ACF under Bill. I think that the ACF needs to have full control over the software that it uses. At the moment it seems to rely on SP a program that it does not control and it is becoming an issue. SP is quickly becoming out of date and the move to sm5 and perhaps other pairing programs appears to be inevitable. I have no way of knowing what the actual program that does the ratings calculations is and how easy it would be to adapt to do calculations off of other ways of presenting rules to be rated. It would be good if it could rate tournaments that are paired using a range of programs including sm5. This could be importing from text files, although I don't even know whether sm5 exports text files. To go down the route of relying on Tornelo, a program that is owned by a businessman who has had differences with the ACF seems risky. What if it is suddenly not there? This does not have to be because David does something wrong, or means for it not to be there. It is not a simple decision and I would want to look at all the options in more detail. What can the current ACF rating system actually do? What can Tornelo do? What is David willing to implement in Tornelo to meet the ACF requirements? What files can sm5 produce that could be used to rate tournaments? When I had these answers I would be in a lot better position to make a decision. I certainly don't think it is as simple as saying Tornelo looks great, Tornelo is great, lets use it, but after a thorough examination it might be worth using. Scott

03-25-2011, 05:30 PM	#8 (permalink)
Amir Karibasic Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Gold Coast Posts: 194	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer. Scott It seems you didn't notice that I used it in a metaphorical form, next time I'll make it easier for you to understand. __________________ . Visit my chess shop! Last edited by Amir Karibasic : 03-25-2011 at 05:42 PM

03-25-2011, 08:38 PM	#9 (permalink)
ChessGuru Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 232	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver Tornelo could present ratings a bit more attractively, that is true but that is only an extremely minor issue as far as I am concerned. I think you underestimate the importance of attractive design and presentation. Take a look at the real world and presentation is EVERYTHING. Movie stars, politicians, Apple everything, hotels, all the most successful products are the most attractive ones.... improve the look of ratings and you'll increase participation by 10%. Maybe not logical, maybe not sensible...but it's a fact.

03-25-2011, 08:48 PM	#10 (permalink)
ChessGuru Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 232	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver I think that the ACF needs to have full control over the software that it uses. Like Word and MYOB? Or G-mail? Or like SM5? Unless the ACF wants to spend a couple hundred grand developing software - which they won't really "control" anyway, because any changes would cost bucks. Originally Posted by Scott Colliver It would be good if it could rate tournaments that are paired using a range of programs including sm5. Actually Tornelo can do this already. Originally Posted by Scott Colliver To go down the route of relying on Tornelo, a program that is owned by a businessman who has had differences with the ACF seems risky. What if it is suddenly not there? It could be a good way of reconciling differences? If it's "suddenly" not there then the same thing happens as if Bill Gletsos is "suddenly" not there - or SM or SP. You find something else. Originally Posted by Scott Colliver It is not a simple decision and I would want to look at all the options in more detail. At the moment the ACF is trying to ban your ability to look at all the options. Nobody's asking for a decision now...all we want is for the ACF to give tournament organisers the opportunity to consider all the options. What can the current ACF rating system actually do? Um, we see it every few months....no surprises. What can Tornelo do? That's what we'd like to find out....the ACF should be supportive of asking this question. At the moment the ACF isn't even prepared to ask that question. What is David willing to implement in Tornelo to meet the ACF requirements? Whatever it takes. What files can sm5 produce that could be used to rate tournaments? The advantage of Tornelo is not so much that it can rate tournaments...it is a TIME SAVER. Tornelo integrates; tournament entries, pairings, results publication and games -- and produces ratings. It means you use one process rather than 5. ...but after a thorough examination it might be worth using. Scott I am thrilled that you feel this way! Can you please write to the ACF and tell them that you'd like to see a thorough examination.

03-25-2011, 09:47 PM	#11 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver This is a silly idea, sorry Amir. A computer program cannot be a ratings officer. Scott A set of lights and a camera can be a traffic cop. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

03-25-2011, 10:12 PM	#12 (permalink)
Scott Colliver Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 88	Originally Posted by ChessGuru Like Word and MYOB? Or G-mail? Or like SM5? Unless the ACF wants to spend a couple hundred grand developing software - which they won't really "control" anyway, because any changes would cost bucks. Actually Tornelo can do this already. It could be a good way of reconciling differences? If it's "suddenly" not there then the same thing happens as if Bill Gletsos is "suddenly" not there - or SM or SP. You find something else. At the moment the ACF is trying to ban your ability to look at all the options. Nobody's asking for a decision now...all we want is for the ACF to give tournament organisers the opportunity to consider all the options. Um, we see it every few months....no surprises. That's what we'd like to find out....the ACF should be supportive of asking this question. At the moment the ACF isn't even prepared to ask that question. Whatever it takes. The advantage of Tornelo is not so much that it can rate tournaments...it is a TIME SAVER. Tornelo integrates; tournament entries, pairings, results publication and games -- and produces ratings. It means you use one process rather than 5. I am thrilled that you feel this way! Can you please write to the ACF and tell them that you'd like to see a thorough examination. David, I am sure a lot of the things you say are true of the potential of the program. It is worth noting that the ACF has two ratings officers so if one is not there for some reason then there is still someone there who knows what is going on. Also it would rely on one of your servers still being in operation. As far as the ACF system goes, when I asked "What can the ACF system do?" I did not mean what does it produce. Sorry for the confusion, but I meant what software does it use? Is there custom made software? Do they use a spreadsheet, database etc? The ACF probably has answers to alot of what I am asking and maybe they had information to make a decision. I am not really interested in doing such an examination myself. I guess I will get to learn alot more about Tornelo at Doeberl. I probably should by myself a copy of Swiss Manager and Swiss Master so I can get familar with those programs but really can not justify the cost at the moment as my work situation is not the greatest. Tournament Director is one of the other FIDE approved pairing programs and it is a program that has been written specifically to be used in tournaments in Britain and to integrate with their rating system. Something like that would be brilliant. It is a real pity that there was a falling out between the ACF and the SP developer and it could not have been updated. Scott

03-25-2011, 10:14 PM	#13 (permalink)
Scott Colliver Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 88	Originally Posted by Iconoclast A set of lights and a camera can be a traffic cop. No, I don't think so.

03-25-2011, 10:32 PM	#14 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 2,302	Originally Posted by Scott Colliver No, I don't think so. Scotty Scotty Scooottyyyyyyy. Maaaaaaate. You need to get your inner aspie under control. Most of what is posted here is analogous - not literal. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

03-26-2011, 06:51 PM	#15 (permalink)
Kings of chess Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Gold Coast Posts: 393	We do have the following answers: 1. TORNELO needs to improve the pairing system 2. TORNELO should not use mobile phones ( My opinion is still IPAD's and Tabloids are way to go, it just needs to be verifyed by the FIDE (Monroi did it the same way), the price of simple tabloids will depreciate within 1-2 Years) But we do not have an exact answer: Why can we not use the TORNELO for rating purposes? Does the TORNELO need to be developed in a better way, as it is not, as accurate as it should be? For Scott as a Player, he is not interested in the graphical details, but if his arbitrage information would appear on the TORNELO; tournaments, title, expertise, public reference than he would be interested in the TORNELO. Therefore I think that the TORNELO could also include Arbiter information. Also it would be good for all players to include their success in the tournament and championships, their coach information or chess school. Practicly, The Tornelo must be verified by FIDE first - other way ACF will not accept it- but how long before that happens? __________________ www.kingsofchess.biz Last edited by Kings of chess : 03-27-2011 at 07:53 AM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: