This was the incident which I praised Sam for in an earlier post. It
is amazing that this could be summarized as a case where a board
member was forced to resign because of a dispute with the rating
committee. This was a pure and simple case of ratings fraud. There is
nobody at fault here except for the board member.
It is easy to say that the ratings committee should catch this, but
very hard in practice. There are too many pieces of data coming in to
check whether every one is legitimiate. The rating committee's chief
job is to set up a good system, not to police it. Every rating system
can be manipulated by a cheater placed in a position of trust. It is
rare for a TD to cheat in this way; unfortunately, it is not the only
case. I do not hold the rating system or the rating committee at
fault, just as I would not hold the national basketball league at
fault if a referee is found to be in the pay of gamblers. The fault is
all on the trusted individual.
For those who tout FIDE's superiority in all things, FIDE has had
ratings manipulations schemes as well. In this case, Sam did a good
job exposing a cheater; blaming it on anybody but the cheater (in
particular, making it seem like the cheater was a victim!) is a very
strange way of looking at the case.
Jerry Spinrad
On Apr 6, 3:50=A0pm, "J.D. Walker" <j.d.wal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 2:02 pm, "J.D. Walker" <j.d.wal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Chess One wrote:
> >>> "samsloan" <samhsl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>>>news:9557df57-d941-4098-a3e1-607eca688249@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> On Apr 6, 10:16 am, "Chess One" <OneCh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>> Ken Sloan's administration of the USCF rating department
occassioned=
a
> >>>>> board
> >>>>> member to resign! That's not false.
> >>>> I am really curious. I have never heard this one before.
> >>>> What board member resigned, and why?
> >>> I am not mentioning his name, since there is no need to celebrate
the
> >>> fallen - and indeed he seems to have acted on very bad advice to
accep=
t a
> >>> title. But what of the responsibility of those awarding the title?
> >>> But this player was on the board preceeding yours, and the crime was
f=
or
> >>> ratings rigging - so that he played the same half dozen players in
clo=
sed
> >>> tournaments, and they all rated 1650/1800 - thereby he gained a
point =
or two
> >>> at a time. I am not sure he ever played anyone 2200 or above.
> >>> At the time everyone was shocked he should have done so, yet 2 USCF
> >>> departments allowed (a) him to continue ac***ulating points this way
[=
that's
> >>> the rating dept], and (b) then another department made him a
life-mast=
er
> >>> with a ratings floor. Neither of them seem to notice his opponent's
le=
vel of
> >>> play.
> >>> I mention this particularly since the guy who egged him on and
encoura=
ged
> >>> him to apply for the title is a USCF Delegate, Eric Johnson, and the
g=
uy who
> >>> oversaw the ratings department is Ken Sloan, and this pair decided
in =
YOUR
> >>> newsgroup to rubbish other companies ratings 'quality control', with
a=
ll the
> >>> usual absense of detail, and abstract criticism.
> >>> Ken Sloan has failed to assure anyone that this fault is not a
common =
one at
> >>> USCF, therefore he never 'notices' my question, 'how frequently has
th=
is
> >>> happened', even though he assures us that all is OK. The only thing
he=
has
> >>> ever responded with is the comment 'how do you know nothing has
change=
d',
> >>> which is as mindless a piece of verbage as he could insult USCF's
syst=
em
> >>> with, since the answer lies in his own inability and unwillingness
to =
show
> >>> if anything changed.
> >>> Why another department should also not have noticed such a prominent
> >>> ratings-account when giving the player a Masters award and a ratings
f=
loor
> >>> is also entirely 'unclear', except to say that he was a politico and
i=
nto a
> >>> Fide postion...
> >>> Makes a change to getting a watch.
> >>> Phil Innes
> >>>> Sam Sloan
> >> Phil,
>
> >> This incident is pretty interesting. =A0Was it ever published in an
> >> investigative article that I could read on the net? =A0I'd love to
know=
> >> more. =A0If not, it sounds like an issue that deserves an
investigation=
..
> >> --
>
> >> Cordially,
> >> Rev. J.D. Walker, MsD, U.C.
>
> > He is referring to Robert Tanner and that is not what happened at all.
>
> > The whole story is at:
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/376c468af...
>
> > Basically Tanner created three fake personalities, all rated around
> > 2200-2300 and played Quads against them over and over again, thereby
> > raising his own rating to over 2300, giving himself a floor of 2200.
>
> > The first fake person was Andre Peroit. The first rating of Andre
> > Peroit was a provisional 2356 in the 1992
> > Wyoming National Parks RR in Jackson, Wyoming, directed by 'I'anner.
>
> > He then created Milan Djiatlich and Leopold Rodl and played them over
> > and over, winning 31 consecutive games against =A0Milan Djiatlich, who
> > supposedly was rated over 2300.
>
> > None of this had anything to do with Ken Sloan or Eric Johnson.
>
> > Sam Sloan
>
> Sam,
>
> Thanks for the reply and the link Sam. =A0I am going to once again sail
> upon troubled waters by saying that this complaint on the surface
> appears to be very detailed and consequently the product of much
> research. =A0If it is all accurate, then, /I am impressed with your
> research skills in this instance./
>
> However, your critics suggest that your facts and conclusions are to be
> generally regarded as suspect. =A0Since this is a past event perhaps
> someone else has put in as much or more work to dig out the facts of
> this event. =A0Is there any thing else I can read to possibly balance
the
> re****tage of this event?
>
> What exactly happened after you lodged this complaint?
> --
>
> Cordially,
> Rev. J.D. Walker, MsD, U.C.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
