Banning participants from an Open Tournament

Running Chess Tournaments
1

I appreciate the collective wisdom of these forums. Although I’ve been a Club TD for the better part of a year, I never knew they existed until this week!

What a wealth of information! Thanks to all who share their insights.

My questions:

a) What are the legalities from a USCF perspective of disallowing a potential registrant to an advertised open tournament based upon past behavior?

b) Is there a protocol which must be followed or does the TD have discretion as to whose entry he wishes to accept and whose he wishes to deny?

c) Are we denying someone due process if we prevent their entry?

At this point, I’m asking an entirely “theoretical” question. But if someone wants to hear the particular scenarios which prompted this topic, I suppose I might reluctantly post a few. I’d love to hear some of the challenging situations others have encountered. I had no idea these types of things would occur when I signed up to be a TD. Call me naive!

2

An organizer “owns” the tournament, and can exclude anyone they want because of past bad behavior. Also, the USCF can take away your privilege to run USCF rated tournaments.

3

That’s an unhelpful answer. It suggests that if the former happens, the latter will automatically follow.

I, for one, am also curious about the original poster’s question. Generally speaking, I’m inclined to give a player the benefit of the doubt until he shows himself unworthy of it. However, I can think of two individuals whom, based on their extensive histories of bad behavior, I’d exclude not only from any tournament I directed but from the entire premises, unless there were some rule prohibiting me from doing so.

4

I don’t have a rule book handy with me but I thought there was a process that had to be following which included contacting the player ahead of time and also the USCF.

5

I will always err on the side of player safety. If I have someone that I know to be a threat to safety for anyone in the event then I will take whatever steps are necessary to bar that player - even if I do not get all of the ts crossed and is dotted from a USCF perspective. The only reason I would not take the steps the USCF lays out is if due to a time issue. But I have had players escorted off of tournament venues and taken them out of the tournament based on events at that tournament. That is not your question I know - but rest assured you can easily do that. I have had venues where the venue barred a person from the premises due to issues between the property owner and the potential player as well.

Like Sevan I do not have a rule book handy but there is a procedure for this. I think one should follow that procedure as closely as possible, but always err on the side of player safety.

If the issue is a cheating problem, and player safety is not a concern, then I will follow the USCF rule/guidelines to the letter. With scholastic players I have found conversations with parents or coaches when there are allegations (or proof) of cheating to usually be very productive.

6

I suggested no such thing. Just because two sentences are next to each other doesn’t mean the content of one must lead to the content of the other. They were simply two true statements that would be helpful to know.

7
8

I will stand by what I posted earlier- if I think there is a threat to the safety of the event, I will take whatever action necessary to prevent that. If time will not allow for an elaborate process, then that is too bad. I am also not worried about an appeal in that case - pull my certification if you don’t like it. Such cases are EXTREMELY rare. Let me provide examples.

Case in point (true story) - Open tournament with kids playing. I have had a registered sex offender show up whom I know has a requirement to avoid contact with children. His prescence at the event is a violation of the law. I believe it is perfectly OK for me to deny him entry into the tournament for this is not due to any personal reason of mine. In this case, the player saw who was in attendance and told me he was sorry for coming as he was not aware there would be children at the event and left so I did not have to take any action. But if I had been required to deny him admittance then I will face anyone as to the correctness of that decision.

I have held events in venues where the facility had a rule against the possession of firearms in the building. It is perfectly OK to tell the player they will have to leave the gun outside even though they have a concealed carry permit or they have to leave. (another true story - and they went out and put the gun in the truck. He just forgot and I knew that but he couldn’t carry in the church.)

Most players “get it” and don’t provide much of a problem in these matters. The problems are the occasional “nut” who doesn’t get along at all well with others. While we have some volitile personalities, those are not common and one can usually deal with them easily enough if one has the maturity and sense not to escalate the situation.

The rule is written to keep a TD or organizer from denying someone the right to play based on the normal non-discrimination issues as well as preventing barring someone “just because”. It also prevent one from holding events in locations where a player would be unwelcome for all these same reasons. So you should not hold a tournament at the local (pick your group) HQ with the understanding that people the (pick your group) does not like cannot attend.

9

Thank you. I tried my darnedest to find it in the index and came up empty.

10

I appreciate all the thoughtful replies.

Glad to see there is an Ethics Committee with an established process.

Has anyone reading this ever submitted a petition to this committee? Anyone out there ever served on this committee? Anyone been the subject of a committee inquiry?

It is common sense in this day and age that we would not wish to violate a protected class. I know I attempt to advertise ADA accessibility and willingness to accommodate special requests in that realm. And yet we regularly see events which are restricted by age or gender.

It is indeed a yeoman’s challenge to follow the letter of this protocol while assuring protection of relationships with venue management and most importantly, the safety of children who are inevitably present at most events.

Certain principles are vital to a just society and I’m glad the USCF attempts to protect “the little guy”. But as some have pointed out here, when simultaneously considering safety and communal good, it’s a challenging balancing act.

11

If you ban somebody from playing in an event, then you have to have a reason other than personal dislike of that player. If the organizing affiliate is a club, you should make sure you give the person “due process” in the club, including a chance to appeal the decision to club, I’d say. A state affiliate might be held to an even higher standard.

If you run your own personal affiliate, you have a bit more leeway. I’d expect CCA to be run as a “club” of one person, for example – anything Goichberg decides would be final. You’d have to make a case against such an affiliate to the ethics committee if you didn’t like its decision and the burden of proof would be on you as the accuser of the affiliate, rather than the affiliate having to prove a case against the banned player. The affiliate just has to show that they acted REASONABLY, not that they were actually RIGHT.

Personally, I think the fact that Sam Sloan has filed a frivolous, chess-related lawsuit against me (and it was the JUDGE’s opinion that it was frivolous, not just mine) would give me a perfectly good reason to ban Sam Sloan from one of my own tournaments. I honestly don’t understand why people would tolerate somebody that’s cost the USCF so many thousands of dollars by REPEATEDLY suing the USCF. I can’t imagine why he’s not banned from tournaments Bill Goichberg runs – after all, he’s also filed a frivolous lawsuit against Bill Goichberg (and the CCA). On the other hand, however, the delegates of the USCF were reluctant to reach a decision that would prevent Susan Polgar from playing in USCF events, and she cost the USCF even more. I wouldn’t want to welcome her at one of my tournaments, either.

If either of them don’t like my “ban” (which isn’t exactly much of a ban since I think there is zero chance one of them would actually want to play in one of my tournaments), they could always appeal. But I think I’d win. Nobody will force you to let people play in your tournaments as long as you have a good reason. While that “good reason” may be a bit subjective and you won’t find clear rules, there are some pretty clear examples of “good reasons” and equally clear examples of “bad reasons” that would get you into trouble:

Good reasons:

  1. The person has made threats or you have other reasonable grounds for believing that he would be dangerous to have in your tournament.
  2. The person has, to your knowledge, committed an ethics violation related to tournament play. This wouldn’t necessarily have to have been settled through a complaint to the ethics committee. If you’ve kicked him out of a tournament for cheating then that should be a good enough reason.
  3. Previous disruptive behavior at a tournament that actually interfered with the event.
  4. Even something as “minor” as: the person has withdrawn from some of your previous events without notice (forfeiting a game and leaving an opponent waiting at the table for an hour) and without providing any explanation afterward.

Bad reasons:

  1. The person’s political beliefs.
  2. The person’s religious beliefs.
  3. The person’s race.
  4. The person’s disability.

If you’ve got something “in-between”, and you want further advice, then you’ll have to provide more details. The weaker the reason, the more careful you’ll need to be to show that you’re acting fairly, consistently, and reasonably (and not secretly wanting to ban the person for one of those “bad reasons”).

12

Yep. I filed a complaint against Sam Sloan, but it wasn’t about actions at a tournament, so it’s not all that relevant. Most regular readers in the forums can provide a few other examples. Robert Tanner was accused of manipulating his rating, for example. That would probably be a good enough reason to justify a ban (from your own events) but the ethics committee didn’t take such a harsh action.

The ethics committee is where you’d have to go if you wanted somebody banned from ALL events (or otherwise sanctioned). There’s a fee ($25? – it’s been a while, I’m not sure I remember) for filing a complaint – this cuts down on frivolous complaints and will be refunded if the ethics committee feels your complaint was justified.

One important point – the ethics committee doesn’t do an “inquiry”. It’s up to the accuser to gather the evidence and present the case. Likewise, the accused has an opportunity to present evidence on his side (and, again, it’s up to the accused – nobody on the ethics committee will play investigator for EITHER side).

You don’t need to go there just to ban somebody from your own events, though. And as long as you’re being reasonable, I don’t think there’s much chance you’d have to worry about being penalized by the ethics committee for having banned somebody.

13

There is a law going through Congress which will allow states to write laws allowing an individual to carry a concealed weapon. Under this ridiculous statute, if one state approves the carrying of a weapon and he goes across a state line, the other state’s firearms laws banning concealment will not apply. It will make it a federal crime for anyone to interfere with the individual’s gun rights. What is a TD to do now if such a law would pass? (Fortunately, chances of passage or even consideration in the Senate are 0%)

You better have a pretty good, and legal reason, to deny anyone from entry to your tournament. It cannot be a personal or trivial reason but fit into established categories of offenses. These may include felonious or malicious behavior in past events; if the individual is listed by the authorities as a sex offender, as examples. It might also be possible to ban someone with notoriously poor hygeine. I would suggest that you provide notice, however, and have an appeals committee on hand to deal with any appeal. You may inform the individual he can file a complaint with the USCF Ethics committee against your decision and the decision of the on-site appeals committee, and explain the appeals process and the filing fee. At this point he will probably just give up, but some people are stubborn.

Without further details it is not possible to say whether you are within your rights as a TD/organizer to ban the individual, but at least you have the procedure and the citation from the Rulebook to back you up. From the above posts, some are willing to use personal reasons to ban someone, but that would be against the USCF Code of Ethics.

14

Give an example of “personal reasons” somebody has said they’re willing to use.

No organizer is compelled to let somebody play IF there’s a good reason. And it doesn’t have to be some “established category” (though I do agree that it should be non-“trivial”).

And it doesn’t need to be some reason from the rule book! (though, with the code of ethics included in the rule book, you’ve got pretty wide latitude, all things considered) Protecting scholastic players from indecent behavior, for example, isn’t called out in the rules, but is a perfectly legitimate reason. Another example would be banning somebody for using foul, racist, or sexist language. A chess tournament should be a pleasant experience for the other players, and somebody that is likely to make the tournament excessively unpleasant can be told that his business isn’t wanted. Ideally, of course, your standards should be consistently applied – otherwise it’ll look like you’re just making an excuse to ban somebody – but they don’t have to be the same standards other tournament directors use. A TD in California might not mind behavior that would get a person banned in Texas, and THAT’S OK.

Not that I think people should go crazy with banning players – I’ve never actually turned a player away from a tournament, nor have I witnessed such an event – but IF you think you have a good reason, then act on it. Not doing so could be a bigger mistake. Think of how awful it could be if the abusive, threatening person that you considered banning (but didn’t) carried through with one of his threats at your tournament! Even at a less serious level, you shouldn’t have to tolerate a player that’s expected to cost you business by driving away other players through inappropriate behavior.

15

I can only think of three reasons why I might ban someone from playing in a tournament (as in, “you can never play in one of my tournaments again”).

(1) I have reason to believe that the safety of any player or tournament staff member is at risk.

(2) The player is not allowed at the venue due to prior decision of the organizer or venue owner.

(3) A player’s repeated misconduct was so egregious that it deserves permanent expulsion from my events.

I have seen cases in (1) and (2) before. Allen Priest’s example of (1) is more direct than mine.

(1) - I was helping to coach my high school alma mater’s team at a local scholastic tournament. Player A was a known behavior issue, who was fully enabled by his overbearing father. Player B was just another local kid. I didn’t have any connection to either of them. The two players were playing on Player B’s equipment, when a brief dispute ensued. Player A then purposely spit all over Player B’s board and pieces. Player B, naturally, didn’t want to continue the game. The TD threw Player A out, and his father appealed the decision. The TD put together a three-person appeals committee, including me. We took about sixty seconds to uphold his decision, and the Metro St. Louis Interscholastic Chess League wound up permanently banning Player A from any of its tournaments.

(2) - Player H had been previously banned from using the facilities of the Pittsburgh Chess Club. This ban was still in effect when I started regularly directing their tournaments in 2003, but I didn’t know about it. Player H showed up, wanting to register for a tournament. He needed to renew his USCF, so I took payment for that, and was about to take his entry fee when a club officer came up and told me that Player H was actually not allowed on the premises. I advised Player H of this, and he didn’t argue. I gave him his entry fee and USCF money back, and asked him to leave, which he did.

I would think that, to demonstrate (3), you’d want to have a pretty good paper trail. This should include, at a minimum: notes of any conversations you had with the offender, including date and time; full description of each incident, with witnesses if possible; and at least one warning by formal written communication advising the offender that he is risking permanent expulsion from your or your organization’s tournaments (sent via registered mail).

16

Over the years there have been several cases where a banned player took his case to the Ethics committee. As far as I know, in every case the Committee has upheld the ban imposed by the organizer or TD. (I was on the Committee for a short time, but not in recent years.) In most, if not all, of these cases, the player had been banned for egregiously disruptive behavior.

There is a $25 fee for filing a grievance with this Committee. (Same goes for the Rules and TDCC committees, I believe.) They’ll refund the $25 unless they feel the claimant’s case is frivolous.

Bill Smythe

17

I also served on the Ethics Committee for many years. As Bill mentions, there have been several “banning” cases brought to the Committee. In every case that I can recall, the behavior for which the ban was imposed was clearly unacceptable - and, there was a clear paper trail including advance notice to the player in writing.

My advice would be that in order to make sure a ban “sticks”, unless there is a truly outrageous incident don’t impose it on the first instance of bad behaviour. Instead, send a certified letter to the player warning of a possible future ban if there is another incident. Then, if you have to, impose the ban with a written notice after a second incident.

– Hal Terrie

18

Have you ever given any penalty (even an empty gesture like a censure or reprimand without other consequences) to an organizer for banning a player?

19

Again, thanks for so many experienced points of view.

While I do generally ask for email addresses from newcomers to my events, I have never asked for a player’s residential address (other than when processing a USCF membership application).

This would make sending a certified mailing rather difficult. Is there an underlying suggestion that such addresses be gathered for everyone “just in case”?

Are permanent bans advisable? If someone demonstrates contrition, should they be allowed to request reinstatement?

20

Not that I can recall. That doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t have. We just didn’t receive any complaints where the bans turned out to be capricious or personal.

– Hal Terrie