The definition of a Class R tournament at present is basically an 8 player tournament with an average rating over 1800. I know that under a prior iteration of FIDE rules that there was some justification for requiring US Chess TDs, at higher certification levels, to do this type of event. Based on my limited understanding, those reasons no longer exist. It does seem that requiring a Class R tournament for the ANTD certification level perhaps imposes a barrier (especially in parts of the federation where locating 8+ “higher rated” players is not always easy to do) with little benefit. Would others (especially experience TDs and/or members of the TDCC) agree that it might be worthwhile to revise the definition of a Class R tournament to be something like “at least six players with an average rating of at least 1000”? Would this be an appropriate topic for an ADM?
No I do not believe it would be an appropriate topic for an ADM. The delegates do not have within their defined powers the ability to define TD certification standards.
The board of directors of an entity have the ability to govern all aspects of that organization. The board of directors is the EB.
Under Illinois non-profit law, one can delegate certain powers to other bodies, if those powers are enumerated in the articles of incorporation. Those powers which have been reserved for the delegates are the authority to:
- amend the Bylaws and the USCF Official Rules of Chess,
- approve the annual budget,
- approve the sale of real estate owned by the USCF,
- approve any borrowing secured by real estate owned by the USCF,
- establish, amend or revoke one or more trusts for the management of Life Member assets and appoint or remove one or more Trustees for the purpose of administering said trusts,
- and supervise the ethics compliance process of the Federation.
While TD certification standards happen to be printed in the book, they are not part of the Rules of Chess. Indeed the TDCC passed some changes in the certification standards fairly recently (category T requirements) without delegate approval - which I believe was completely appropriate to do (whether or not I happen to agree with the change)
So I do not believe that the delegates can demand that the certification standards be changed. I do think the delegates can suggest that they be changed. A better approach might be to contact the TDCC (which is an EB appointed committee) and ask for a change, or to ask the EB about it.
A response to such a request might be to receive an explanation of why it is in the standards to begin with.
I would attend the TDCC workshop to discuss it with a heads up to the TDCC chair to get it on the agenda.
Thanks Allen. Appreciate your insights. Happy to discuss with the TDCC (although not certain I will be able to make the meeting this year, I hate having full time employment) and certainly would not move forward with the idea if the TDCC had reasons to oppose the change. I did make the proposal in the form of a question in the hopes that I could receive some feedback here before taking it to the TDCC.
The distinction regarding the certification standards being in the rulebook but not technically rules was also helpful. That makes sense to me.
This issue comes up periodically in the TDCC. The last time was within the past year and there was no support for making a change.
Note that two blitz round robins (1800+ average blitz rating) can be used to fulfill the requirement. Blitz ratings are initialized from regular ratings, so use the regular rating if there is no blitz rating for the player.
I do appreciate the problem though of folks who are in areas where coming up with 8 players with an average rating of 1800 is no small feat. Perhaps easier in most urban areas but darn hard in most rural areas. Some whole states cannot field such a group.
Sorry - a bit off topic - but where can i find info about this years TDCC? does that happen at one of the national events?
thx.
-Jere
I don’t understand the question.
Alex Relyea
Jere, assuming I understand your question, the TDCC has both a “business meeting” and a workshop at the US Open, as do all/most of the other US Chess committees (except they have only meetings, not a TD workshop, which is a meeting to help TDs improve their skills). These meetings are held on Wed/Thurs/Fri the week of the US Open in early August.
The US Open has a TDCC (Tournament Director Certification Committee) meeting which includes a mini-TD workshop (b3 substitution for LTD qualification or b1 for SrTD). There are generally a small percentage of TDCC members there and various USChess members interested in TDCC areas of concern. There may be non-scripted discussions one practices that make things easier for TDs and players.
The US Open meeting schedule is not yet solidified. Last year the TDCC meeting was Wed at 3 PM and the workshop was Wed at 4 PM.
And the work the TDCC has done is also published in it’s annual report that appears in the Delegates Call (which I seem to recall is available as a pdf on the US Chess website when it is finalized). All committees are given the chance to prepare and publish an annual report in the Delegates Call. The TDCC conducts business via a closed Yahoo group. Besides discussions on TD policy, the TDCC handles appeals filed by players regarding TD decisions/actions. We also advise the Board as needed/requested (TD of the Year, Lifetime Achievement award, etc.).