The school affiliate may run a scholastic rated event that is open only to students from that school. In essence, an intramural event – in which case players under 20 can use JTP if they have not previously been USCF members.
The school affiliate may run a section or event that is primary (grade 3 and under) and is open to scholastic players outside of the school, in which case scholastic players from the school can use JTP if they have not previously been USCF members, but players outside the school may not.
I have read it argued that [A] ANY affiliate may run a primary scholastic tournament and that ALL players in the tournament can use JTP.
Was this broadened or was my prior understanding wrong?
The website does point out that "JTPs may not compete in rated events outside of their home school unless they become USCF members. ". This would make no sense if statement [A] is correct.
My past sense was that USCF was open to exposing scholastic players to rated chess on a limited intramural basis, and that they were willing to be a little broader than that for primary events because when this was first thought up it wasn’t always easy to get a sufficient number of primary players at one school – hence the allowance for a primary school JTP event with outside players.
Is my understanding completely wrong? Thanks for your help!
That page appears to be rather old, and is a bit behind the times, not to mention a bit inconsistent with what has been said elsewhere.
For example, the chess coach certification program was discontinued over a year ago, and the scholastic council is still considering what to replace it with.
The idea of enforcing limiting JTP participation to those who have not been USCF members is impractical, and probably pointless as well.
The current rules (as implemented in the programming) are as follows:
Any affiliate can run a JTP event for students in Grade 3 and below.
A scholastic affiliate can run a JTP event for students in grade 12 or below, providing that:
A. All players attend the same school.
B. The school is also the holder of the scholastic affiliate.
Once an event has been coded as JTP, memberships that have lapsed are not considered errors. However, we do check the ages of the players to make sure they are reasonable for a K-3 or K-12 event.
There are literally thousands of pages on the website that are out of date. This is yet another one that needs revision or elimination.
I am surprised, though, that any affiliate can run a primary section and that anyone can play in it. Seems to potentially give away a lot of revenue. In IL there is now talk about eliminating the requirement for membership in K-3 events. That would potentially eliminate probably 250-400 members throughout a year, is my guess. My thought – as I noted before – was that this was supposed to be more limited. When was this thing last changed – anyone know?
I have heard many different opinions on JTP over the last several months.
It began with a discussion of whether parents of k-1 grade players should be forced to buy a membership that came with a magazine when most likely they were going to play 3 or 4 tournaments a year.
Then I was told that we should run unrated sections and that many scholastic tournaments are run that way.
Then someone told me that the USCF had a program for kids that if they were just starting out, they would not need to join the USCF, but could register as JTP players.
Then I was shown the information online and told that at any tournament, the primary section could be run as JTP events.
Then I was told that K-3 events would not be checked for membership if they were marked “primary” and everyone was either JTP or members.
I believe players in Illinois (especially the Bloomington/Normal area) are being encouraged to join the USCF if they intend to play at National USCF tournament or if they wish to play in sections above the 3rd grade.
I do think we will see a substantial increase of participation due to especially K-1 not being required to join USCF. Parents will be a lot less reluctant to let their children “give it a try” Additionally, I plan on having all 60-70 children at my K-8 school who do not join as USCF members sign up as JTP players and play club tounaments with the hope that some will decide to want to go to a “real” tournament and try it.
I think ultimatly, it might be a boost to USCF membership in the 3 rd grade on up. We’ll see!!
That would be an issue for State Associations to decide, don’t you think. It would probably be a boost to K-1 attendance, especially local attendance if membership were not required. Someone, sometime must have thought that it should not apply to State Tournaments because the JTP instructions specifically any tournament but the USCF National Scholastics. Just my Opinion.
I wish it was an issue for State Associations to decide. I don’t think it is.
In Indiana you cannot use the JTP program for the State (Scholastic)Championships.
But I really don’t know why that is the case. I would enjoy being enlightened on the subject.
Does the tournament meet the requirements otherwise? (I.e. either all players in grade 3/below, or all players grade 12/below and all from the same school?)
It has never been required that scholastic player be members of the State Association as far as I know. Why did the USCF not require it other than the USCF Nationals?
I think you two are talking past each other. You are saying that the USCF does not require State Association membership, which is true. Kevin is saying that that state chapter can require it for their own tournaments, which is also true, and that they should do so, a point on which the two of you presumably diagree).
You are correct, we do disagree. My position is that if the USCF wanted all K-3 players to purchase USCF membership for State Tournaments, they would not have written the exception the way that they wrote it. The USCF specifically stated that any affiliate can run events as JTP events but that JTP players could not play as JTP in the National Scholastic Tournament. If the USCF went to the trouble of excluding the National Scholastic, the intent must have been to include all other primary chess tournaments. I have specifically asked if that instruction had been changed and was told no that it had not. I believe my opinion is what the USCF intended for States to agree to.
Historically speaking, I think that’s a misinterpretation of how the JTP program got to its present state. In the late 1980s, the JTP membership was available to just about everyone. Around 1990, the powers that were concluded that this was a bad idea, and tried to abolish the program. It still had some boosters, however, so, as a compromise, it was abolished except for certain special cases. (I’m pretty sure they expected it to fade away completely over time.) This doesn’t mean that your position is wrong, just that you can’t argue it from authority.
John is correct that the JTP program has been scaled back several times since the days when it covered just about everyone under 18 (or whatever the cutoff age was.)
I’ve always been reluctant to bring the issue up with the Delegates, for fear the current JTP programs would be scaled back even further.
I do agree, however, that if a state is asking the USCF to recognize an event as a STATE CHAMPIONSHIP EVENT, insisting that USCF membership be required at that event is not unreasonable.
I suppose Illinois could be like other states and just run special unrated sections. I would think the USCF would want to continue recieving rating fees for the games being played. I’m sure that I have never heard or read before now any indication that the USCF has ever had any expectation that the requirement for USCF membership be extended to State Championships. The USCF clearly states “National Scholastic Tournaments” and clearly states any other tournaments held by any affiliates can be run as JTP. Members of the Scholastic Community would probably like to get this cleared up at next years scholastic council meeting and perhaps at the delegates meeting.
A) My argument here is that if an event is recognized by the USCF State affiliate as a state championship event, then USCF membership should be required for that event, since the state affiliate is recognized as such by USCF. I can’t think of an example where an organization confers a regional title without requiring that (appropriate) membership requirements be met, whether it be state school associations, USOC, bowling, etc.
B) IN ADDITION, I think it very reasonable that state associations require some form of state association membership to play in state events. This could be the standar membership, a junior membership, or even a special tournament membership. It is, however, in my mind unreasonable for a player to expect to play for an organization’s title without being a member of that organization.
One of the most important things that USCF and state associations do is confer titles and championships. It is, IMHO, absurd that USCF and state associations consistently undervalue this important function. These groups have to learn to reasonably enforce what is their right, and to treat all their members appropriately – not treat the non-members as well as the members.
As the JTP rules are presently defined, this situation (a state champion not being a USCF member) could only occur in primary (Pre-K through Grade 3) championship events.
How many states even award these titles? Are any of them holding them as Primary JTP events now?
Before we even consider changing any rules, let’s find out what’s happening.
Although not relevant to this particular thread, this type of situation could also occur, even in adult events, if the player purchases a length-of-tournament membership. (Technically he or she is a member FOR THAT ONE EVENT, though.)
Kevin, I’m not altogether sure I understand what you are getting at. As far back as I know (only 6 years) the recognized scholastic part of Illinois Chess has never required state affiliation or membership (ICA membership) for participation in its tournaments.
As of last year, the ICA (Illinois Chess Association) ceded the rights to run Illinois Scholastic Chess Championships to the CoChess organization with as far as I know, no stipualtion of membership.
The CoChess organization does offer an optional membership, but at this point requires no membership.
I guess I am confused by someone I consider to be knowledgeable and who has a history of excellence in the Illinois High School Association (not USCF affiliated) expressing opinion that scholastic chess be held to a stricter standard of membership than the IHSA (Illinois High School Association) and ICCA (Illinois Chess Coaches Association) who has been granted authority by the same body ICA to confer its state championships.
If I understand correctly the High School Association have absolutely no requirement of USCF membership, is this correct? So a requirement of 4th - 8th grade USCF membership would be to a higher standard than the High School organization, is that correct?
I’ll first respond to the JTP in the state championship issue. Later I’ll add some Illinois history.
The USCF has their JTP rules for the national championships. It appears that they gave the various states the option of allowing or disallowing JTP participation in their rated state championships (primary section). I would consider that decision to be one of allowing the option rather than one that suggests a particular decision at the state level.
Thus if a state decides to allow JTP in the state primary championship then that is fine with the USCF. And if a state decides to require non-JTP USCF membership in the state primary championship then that is also fine with the USCF.
Among Illinois K-8 organizers and coaches there are some people who feel that only serious players should play in the state championship (and would thus be likely to want to disallow JTP participation) and others who feel that it should be open to as many players as possible (even to the extent that a 5-round 1-day K-1 section was being considered for a little while in the 2003-2004 school year before finally settling on the 7-round 2-day format also used in the K-3, K-5 and K-8 sections). Currently the K-1 championship is drawing more than 100 players and the K-3 championship is drawing more than 200 more players.
Illinois history
In the early '80s the Illinois Chess Association (ICA) recognized the elementary and middle school state champion, and the tournament was being held in conjunction with a high school and an adult tournament. Since the attendance had been running under 40 players for the combined K-5 and K-8 tournaments, everybody “knew” that those tournaments could never be successfully run as a seperate event. In 1983 and 1984 a grass-roots group started running K-5/K-8 tournaments and held a splinter state championship that drew 110 and 160 players respectively, while the officially recognized one dwindled even further. By the spring of 1985 the ICA gave de jure recognition to the new group as the de facto organizers of the K-5/K-8 state championship. Having some people active in both the K-8 group and the ICA political scene helped the two groups start out with cordial relations. The K-3 section started appearing in 1986 when the tournament first went “downstate”, playing in Peoria in this case.
In the early '90s the perennial K-3/K-5/K-8 state championship chief TD (who had been awarding the tournament bids) pushed for the formation of an official organization of K-8 chess (so that it would be ready by the time he retired to Florida at the end of that decade). This viewpoint admittedly comes from my biased perception as the then-perennial floor chief, though Kevin Bachler has said that at about the same time he was among those on the coaches/organizers side who were already trying to form such an organization. In any case, regardless of where the larger push was coming from, the K-8 organization (CoChess) was formed and was able to take over the awarding of the bids. CoChess was originally anticipated to be a sister organization with the ICA (both memberships could be part of a linked purchase) and the ICA continued to recognize the CoChess tournament as the state championship. Later turnover of the boards in both organizations resulted in an erosion of the linkage and of people not really knowing why things had ended up as they did. Currently the two are definite seperate organizations. Based on meetings in 2004 with the previous ICA president, and with the current ICA president also being on the CoChess board, I would anticipate that the recognition of the CoChess state championship tournament will continue, even though there will continue to be members of the ICA who will question it.
As far as high school goes, the Illinois High School Association (IHSA - it governs all activities such as chess, football, debating, etc.) has explicitly stated that a player CANNOT be required to join another organization to play for their school, and thus the IHSA tournaments do not require USCF membership and are not USCF rated. The ICCA that mnibb mentioned maintains its own rating system, and is actually fairly close to the USCF system as far as showing strength goes. There is not an elementary school organization in Illinois with type of influence that the IHSA has, so the K-8 tournaments are generally USCF rated. The few K-8 scholastic tournaments I’ve done that had an unrated section had only a small percentage of the players in that section.