This is a novel idea about round robin blitz tournaments. The reason for not having them rated, not all blitz players are USCF members. Could have two sections, one section for USCF members, the other non-USCF members. Having two sections could be so small, it would not be worth the time of the players to come again. With the time and commitment to be at the tournament, players would like to play as many games as they can. Since round robins can be of any number of games, players would be happier to play twenty games than ten games.
With advertisement, there should be more USCF members for the USCF section than the non-USCF section. If in that case, the non-USCF section would be small, to the point it does not make any rational sense to play. It would not be much fun, if only a small number shows up. It could be the same problem for the USCF section, a number of USCF members but still small.
Since this is only going to be club meeting tournaments, with the hope that some non-regular club players would show up. The idea at the club, is to have the USCF members and non-USCF members in the same section. Only the USCF members being paired against each other would count for the USCF tournament and the clubs crosstable. If a USCF member and a non-USCF member are paired against each other, it would only count for the clubs crosstable. If both players are non-USCF members, it would only count for the clubs crosstables.
This idea, would give more games for the players. Example, a USCF member could have fifteen games rated and five games non-rated. In the end, the player would enjoy having twenty games then fifteen games. If the player was a non-USCF member, the player would enjoy having twenty games then five games. If the non-USCF member did well in the tournament, the next time around the non-USCF member would have a better reason to join. If the non-USCF member lost a game against a master, what better reason to join the USCF the next time around.
Since the club is going into this mix with USCF and non-USCF members in the same section. Since this is going to be a major variation, as the players are going to have to understand some games will be rated and some would not. The players are going to get a notification about this theory in all pre-advance announcements. I’m not sure this has ever been done before. As it would be so non-standard in any G/30 or slower event. As G/5 tournaments being rated are minor in the amount of them being rated. This theory if it is accepted, could solve the problems of a number of chess clubs that have blitz tournaments.
I’ve actually done this - even with GAME/30 (mea culpa - pretend I’m posting anonymously)…
We started a club, encouraged everyone to become USCF members, and when the first ones actually did we started hearing complaints about there being no USCF tournaments close by. We tried one and got killed financially, and so we would take the club championships and rate the games between USCF members. And so the kids got comfortable with taking notation and clocks and so forth; and when the USCF members always won, it encouraged everyone else to join. Adopting this approach meant we didn’t lose our shirt as often (we now run a rated tournament outside the club every month …) and we’ve added 30 or so USCF members in a little over a year.
You have to start small sometimes … Submit the tournaments online and no one will ever know
From page 260 of the USCF rulebook: All games played in USCF-rated events are rated…
Events in which rated and non-rated games are co-mingled is a violation of the USCF’s tournament requirements and should NOT BE DONE.
Consider this from the standpoint of one of the players. If he has a good game against a player, but it won’t count for USCF rating, is that fair both to that player and to his opponents from other rounds?
I’m not sure that it would be possible to tell by looking at a crosstable whether there was a co-mingling of rated and non-rated games in it, though if necessary I’ve got some ideas as to how I might check for that.
In general, this is a BAD IDEA.
However, having said all that, if there was no way that the ratability of a game affected the pairings or the number of rated games played by each player in the event, such as a round robin, I could see some minimal advantages of such a co-mingling in special circumstances.
I once played in a father-son team event in which the games between the parents were USCF-rated and the games between the kids were not rated. However, the players knew in advance whether all of their games would be rated or not rated.
Think of it this way, it is two tournaments in one. If you are a USCF member, paired with a USCF member, it will count as a USCF round robin tournament, and a club round robin tournament. If you are a USCF member, paired with a non-USCF member, it would only count as a club round robin tournament. If you are a non-USCF member, all the games will count as a club round robin tournament.
If the USCF member does not want to play with non-USCF member in the round robin, would just forfeit the games in the club round robin tournament. The forfeit games will not count in the USCF rated tournament, as the forfeit games are against non-USCF members. The player would only be in the USCF rated event, the player would not be in the club round robin event. As the forfeit games and the played games would shift the final score, all the games will not count in the final crosstables in the club round robin event. The USCF member would not be forced to play non-USCF members. The player would only be in the USCF rated crosstables, not the clubs crosstables.
Blitz players that go to blitz tournaments enjoy to play as many games as they can get. It would be a double round robin event, so there would not be a question about the color history. If the USCF member has sixteen USCF rated games and four non-USCF games, the member will still enjoy twenty games. If the USCF member does not want to play with the non-USCF member, the member will only enjoy the sixteen rated games.
Any co-mingling of rated and non-rated games has the potential of being used as a means of manipulating the post-event ratings for one or more of the players in the event.
Unless the co-mingling cannot IN ANY WAY affect the pairings or the number of ratable games, the event CANNOT BE RATED BY THE USCF.
This is no different than a TD deciding not to submit some games because of how it would affect someone’s rating.
If we follow your logic, even the skittles’ games would be illegal. As organizers with skittles’ games have rated and unrated games, the USCF is not cracking down to get them rated. What organizer uses the results of skittles’ games as the post-results of the USCF section?
The USCF section does not have any non-USCF members. If you are not a USCF member, you are not in the USCF tournament. That is a given, if your a non-USCF member all your results do not count into the post-USCF event. It is just two independent crosstables, one crosstable for the clubs round robin event: the other crosstables for the USCF event. Each crosstables will have different post-tournament results.
Look at it this way, if you are in the USCF section. If you play ten players in the double round blitz, only the twenty games count for the USCF rating. If you than play two players, two games each with non-USCF members, the results do not count to the USCF tournament. The four games do not count in any post results, they are non-rated, they have nothing to do with the USCF. The four non-rated games, if a term is to be used, are just skittles’ games.
Doug, you’re being silly, perhaps intentionally so.
Skittles games aren’t paired, you don’t care who wins them and you don’t enter the games into your computer or put them on the pairing card, do you?
Drop this subject, you either don’t understand what you’re doing or are deliberately trying to cause problems.
Perhaps TIm Just would like to comment on this, but my feeling is that if a TD submits only some games from a section for rating, that TD should be suspended for violating a basic principle of the USCF ratings system.
