What is this rule? I’m part of a new club and there has been a lot of talk about getting affiliated and holding tournaments. I wouldn’t mind being the club TD, but I’d also like to play. I saw mention of rule 21E in the Tournament Director Certification pdf uschess.org/docs/forms/TDCer … nRules.pdf. What is this rule exactly?
Why are the USCF rules not available online? At best I can only find the updated rules. I thought this was a non-profit so I assumed the rules would be freely available in pdf format.
I don’t have the exact rule handy, but directors are not prohibited from playing in their own events, and for club events and smaller tournaments, it is fairly common for them to do so. The larger a tournament is, the less advisable it is, and I no longer do it at all, because I find that both my directing and my playing suffer if I try to do them simultaneously. But people who are better multitaskers than I manage it OK, and it can be useful sometimes (for example, to avoid forced byes, which some players hate).
There you go: 21E. Yes, you can play and direct at club events. Some people don’t mind doing both, others (like me) do. Ideally maybe two in your club would sign up as directors and you’d take turns. Or, you might do as I do, and play unrated extra games while directing at club events.
Because of the publisher’s contract for the US Chess rulebook, it’s only available as a purchased book or a Kindle download. When you sign up to become a TD, you agree to obtain a rulebook and read it.
Having a tournament requires a director. Some clubs would not have a director unless the director could play. If there is no prize money, if the pairings are done by a computer, and if there are other directors available to rule on the game, then a playing director is quite feasible for a small club tournament and I have done it often (no entry fee, at most a trophy for a prize). If there is prize money then I’ve only done it occasionally as a house player (ineligible for prizes) and only if other directors are fully available to make rulings. It is definitely not recommended but if you do opt to be a playing director for a moderate prize fund then you are greatly increasing the risk that you will not be seen as impartial, so make sure you have other TDs available to rule on your games (and definitely do not be a playing director eligible for those prizes if they are more than moderate). Any issue that arises from a money tournament that has a playing director will look worse because of director being a playing director.
If there is a lot of trust in the playing director then a pairing program is not necessary but otherwise it is advisable just to reinforce the appearance of impartiality in making pairings. Back before pairing programs I know of a scholastic organizer/TD who would manually pair rounds, do them exactly the way I would have done them, and then get accused of favoritism towards players from his school or club. Once he started using a pairing program that came up with exactly the same pairings the accusations disappeared.
Your playing ability does suffer somewhat, but in a friendly club environment you will likely have very few rulings to actually make and thus the amount of suffering may not be noticeable.
I do not teach chess students so I also avoid the concern that some people may have that a playing director is doing so as a way of inflating the TD’s rating so that more can be charged for chess lessons. There is that risk that even for a prize-less tournament people may think the TD has a monetary stake. If you are a chess teacher then you have an even stronger reason to avoid being a playing director.
PS If you can find a low-cost way to legally negate the publishing contract and make the rules available on-line then many people would be quite happy.
I used to both play and direct in small money local events. I never had any of the trust issues that Mr. Wiewel enumerates, but I did find it a good way to lose a hundred rating points in a relatively short period of time. I felt my primary focus should be on directing, and my playing suffered accordingly. Breaking away from my own game to rule on another one broke my train of thought, and when I got back to the board I had to spend time re-orienting myself. It didn’t work out very well for me, and I am no longer willing to play and direct in the same tournament.
I would suggest, in all seriousness, that the passing of Frank Berry leaves a tremendous hole in the ranks of Oklahoma tournament directors. I think it would be greatly beneficial if Mr. Ellis were to become a TD. He could always find a couple more people who are interested and trade off TD duties with them.
You can effectively direct and play in your club events only if there is a long time control. If the tournament is a one game a night event spread over several weeks, playing in it will cause few problems. The problems arise when you have to pair several rounds, deal with phone calls to the club, have questions from new players, and have to make rulings in several games, especially in time pressure. If you can put up with that, then directing will be a charming experience.
I used to direct and play occasionally when I was much younger. Usually when there was an odd number of players and I was not the highest rated player in the field. Before the tournament, I would ask the players if there was any objection if I played. When no one objected, only then would I play. The tournaments always had long time controls; most averaged 40+ players and had two sections. I did my paperwork, making wall charts, during the first round. Sometimes I would count the money and put the registration forms in order during round one, too. If there were disputes, I would not stop my clock, but let it run. I updated the pairing cards and wall charts during the round when my opponent was doing a long think. When pairing the rounds, if there was a situation where both of us was due a color, I ruled in his favor. In the last round, I made sure to always have Black. No one ever complained. I even won a Grand Prix event while directing along with some other tournaments. Didn’t really hurt my rating much to play and direct either, because having to focus on so many things meant I did not have idle time to waste or distract myself. Today, though, with faster time controls, I cannot play and direct. There is too much to do in a much tighter time frame. Plus, sometimes I like to take a nap and let one of my young TDs do the work.
Be aware, too, of the statement in chapter 10, item 7 (uschess.org/docs/gov/reports … hanges.pdf) that “The Chief TD should not himself be a player in the tournament.”
We can quibble about the meaning of the word “should” in the updates to the rules and the statement in the TD certification document, but Rule 21E in Chapter 1 of the Rulebook does allow tournament directors to play in tournaments. The only TDs who cannot also play are those who are chief TDs of National Events.
In 21E, it states that TDs may play in “club events and others that do not involve substantive prizes”. What constitutes “substantive prizes”? I have to assume that this means Grand Prix tournaments, but the lowest level of a Grand Prix event has been allowed to devolve to pretty low amounts of prize money. A small chess club with only one TD may not be able to hold a Grand Prix event to grow interest in chess in the local area unless the TD is able to play, too. He may be the organizer, prize sponsor, and TD of the event. He may bear the risk of whether or not the event is successful. While he “should not” play, the 21E rule does not preclude that because it does not specifically say that TDs “must not” play in Grand Prix tournaments they are running.
In some locales, the most avid player you have might be a TD. He or she might be the dynamo in the USCF affiliate. If there is a Wednesday Night tournament that he usually directs and plays in, the club would not be able to make the tournament a Grand Prix event if the rules are read strictly. Making the tournament a Grand Prix event would draw more and stronger players and maybe make more money for the club through increased entry fees and club memberships, but if the TD is not going to be allowed to play, then the whole idea crashes to a halt. Not all areas are blessed with a bunch of TDs. Rule 21E gives wiggle room for the TD to organize, direct, and play. It does not seem optimal to interpret rules in a way which leads to restricting the growth of chess.
I had taken Rule 21E, when read in conjunction with item 10 in chapter 7, to mean that a TD is allowed to play if, and only if, he/she is not the chief TD for the tournament. But perhaps I have been misreading the intent.
I would rarely even find it practical to play in a tournament where I was the chief TD (or, to phrase it differently, being both a player and a chief TD would almost certainly impede my performance as either a TD, or as a player, or both). But I can imagine that in a tournament with a very low turnout (e.g., 7 players), it might be reasonable for one person to assume both roles, and it could be very beneficial to do this to avoid having an odd number of players.
For me it goes without saying that if I play in a tournament that I’m directing, I would not be eligible for any prizes. I don’t do this anymore anyway, but when I did, it was only under two kinds of circumstances: (1) club events, where there are no prizes; and (2) as a house player in larger tournaments, where I would play only in rounds where there was an odd number of players, and even then, never in the final round (too much else to do). I would never even consider claiming any kind of prize as a playing TD. The prizes are for people who paid an entry fee.
Hello. In 2015, started directing a long-running tournament - it would be my first USCF tournament as TD. I had several reasons to think that I would be able to play this tournament.
Low prizes
Amenable schedule
Small number of participants
But in the end decided to forego playing and make sure everything went smoothly.
2 players at different times came up to me and expressed how grateful they were that I wasn’t playing. No one really expressed wishes or regret that I wasn’t playing. This really stuck with me and I decided not to play going forward. I’ve played a few house games, but have been sure to make it clear I was TD first, player second.
I think players are much less inclined to bother a TD whom is in the middle of a game. While this might cut down on spurious claims - it also might repress some legitimate ones.
So I’ve resolved not to play in these events. I will have to find another way to get my name engraved on the trophy… perhaps running it in secret and having a puppet do the TD-ing.
The only ones I regularly play in while directing are club events where the entry fee is covered by the annual membership fee (and I pay that annual fee). I figure that single-night quick-rated tournaments with no trophies or first-place-only trophies (costing a single digit number of dollars), or multi-week regular-rated tournaments with first-place-only trophies costing less than $20 (and none of the tournaments having monetary prizes) qualify as tournaments without substantial prizes. Having four club members that are Local-level TDs or higher does help.
PS The club has recently added a membership waiver for the quick tournaments in exchange for a $5 entry fee from non-members (juniors playing in all three quick-rated tournaments would find the $12 annual membership less expensive than the per-tournament entry fees and two family members in the same residence would find the $30 family membership to be the same as 2x3 entries).
(I can’t tell if Alex is joking, so I say this for the benefit of others).
I can definitely see a new player/prospective TD thinking this would be normal. After all, all other sports I can think of have their rules online and available for all to see.
There is a third option: Buying the rights from the publisher. How much that would cost or if the publisher is willing to sell, I cannot say. Of course, the idea of shelling out a reasonable sum of money just so the rules can be posted for free online, doesn’t sound like the most sensible idea out there.
