As I said above, I’m not submitting the match for rating as it does not comply with match play rules. Specifically, that both players need to have an Established OTB Classical Rating for a match to be rated.
Further, I cannot even apply to take the Local TD Exam until I get said Established OTB Classical Rating.
Therefore, I just emailed Mr. Pond (ratings@uschess.org) asking for a 3-year extension to my Club TD term.
Thanx for your help,
AJG
Jorge,
Your plan is correct. But try and get an established rating during the extension. According to #2 in Chapter 7, the TD needs an established rating. There is no requirement, as written in the rules, that the rating be time control specific. Therefore, it would seem to me that any rating, either Quick or Regular would suffice. I stress the words “… seem to me”. I am not a USCF official, so this is just my opinion. Remember, the idea of having a rating is for the TD to have proper perspective, as both a player and an organizer/TD. It helps to be a player of the game you’re officiating so that you can know where the other players are coming from.
Let us know what happens.
Good Luck,
Terry Winchester
Evansville, IN
You can have the match rated. Did have this question and talked to Mr Pond some time in the past. When the word established rating is having some form of a rating. If both players both have unknowed ratings and both at 0000/00, the computer software can not rate the event. If you have a provisional rating and the other player does or does not have a established rating, then the software will rate the event.
If you look at my MSA some of my events have been a match. Did have a match with someone with a provisional rating and that match was rated. At this time cannot point to the name of the match or the person but can tell you that the match will be rated.
Glad that you sent Mr Pond a email, the only major problem with a email is that the federation does not always answer all the emails. Finding that it is much faster and more sure to make that phone call.
Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php … 9-12313120
This is the matchs (QT VII) that was done in January 2004, if you read the other form of the one tournament that was lost and had to re-submit the event for rating. The federation did accept this match, then some reason lost it. During the time to get the matchs rated, Marc did get a established quick rating.
As the federation did accept the match for rating when Marc was still a provisional quick player. And the only reason that it was rated was because it was re-submit, as some reason the tournament was lost with a different one. With the talk with Mr Pond and the federation rating the event even that they lost the event. You should still send that match to the federation.
Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
Well, that’s the point of the extension - more time to get the much vaunted Established OTB Classical Rating. BTW, it seems to me that they are in fact referring to a Classical and not a Quick rating.
Regards,
AJG
Dear Garcia:
Look up to the last post. The match is done and just send the match report in. If the federation did not lose the event, Marc would have gained a established quick rating during last winter. Then he was in a number of different events, and when it was re-submit he did have a established rating.
Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
How do you arrive at this conclusion?
I’ve been in several different threads over a period of the last 4 or more months related to this problem…
Whenever someone official, such as Larry Pond, enters the discussion they always refer to my Provisional OTB Classical Rating being short 14 games and never care about my Established OTB Quick Rating!
Albeit, it would be nice if someone “official” would just come out and say that its the Classical or the Quick or both ratings that need to be established.
Regards,
AJG
Jorge, The following quote is from Mr. Pond at USCF (it was back in January, I believe), with the bold text referring to my reply.
First,
Since Mr. Pond referred to Chapter 7 of the rulebook as his mode of determining eligibility, I would think it’s safe to assume that what’s written therein is what we should go by.
Second,
Nowhere in this quote do I see Mr. Pond saying, or implying, that you have to have a regular “classical” rating. The only requirement that I see is that you have to have an established rating. A rating under the Quick system is still a rating.
I think perhaps the biggest misconception, as propigated by my northern friend, is that you can play a rated match and fulfill the requirements of having an established rating. I think you and I both understand that that idea is wrong on its face. USCF may have rated such events in the past, and they may continue to do so, but the idea is wrong and is against the rules as are written in the rulebook and/or posted at USCF’s website.
Still, it’s all up to the USCF office, and I’m anxious to hear what they have to say to your request, if only to serve as an end to this debate. I truely believe we are overwhelming ourselves with this issue. If you have fulfilled the requirements necessary in upgrading to Local TD, as listed in Chapter 7, and you mail, email or call Mr. Pond (as he advised), he will get you on the right track.
Jorge, The following quote is from Mr. Pond at USCF (it was back in January, I believe), with the bold text referring to my reply.
First,
Since Mr. Pond referred to Chapter 7 of the rulebook as his mode of determining eligibility, I would think it’s safe to assume that what’s written therein is what we should go by.
Second,
Nowhere in this quote do I see Mr. Pond saying, or implying, that you have to have a regular “classical” rating. The only requirement that I see is that you have to have an established rating. A rating under the Quick system is still a rating.
I think perhaps the biggest misconception, as propagated by my northern friend, is that you can play a rated match and fulfill the requirements of having an established rating. I think you and I both understand that that idea is wrong on its face. USCF may have rated such events in the past, and they may continue to do so, but the idea is wrong and is against the rules as are written in the rulebook and/or posted at USCF’s website.
Still, it’s all up to the USCF office, and I’m anxious to hear what they have to say to your request, if only to serve as an end to this debate. I truely believe we are overwhelming ourselves with this issue. If you have fulfilled the requirements necessary in upgrading to Local TD, as listed in Chapter 7, and you mail, email or call Mr. Pond (as he advised), he will get you on the right track.
Ok, I see now that you do, in fact, have an established Quick rating, and Mr. Pond did indicate that you were short 14 games on an established rating. Therefore, he must have been referring to the regular rating. I apologize for, once again, not carefully reading the posts.
That being said, we can renew the debate!!! The language in the rulebook does not specify that the rating has to be under the Full-K Regular system. The Rules Committee may need to address this issue with a claification.
In the meantime, you should specify in your contacts with Larry Pond that you do in fact have an established Quick rating.
Please let us know what the outcome is.
I read chapter 7 very carefully and several times. Unfortunately, the wording therein, though better than in previous editions, is still ambiguous. Case in point: what exactly is meant by an estabished rating? Thanx, John, for your input!
I did petition Mr. Pond, via the email address he gave me, for another 3 years as a Club TD in order to finally get this ellusive established rating. Thanx, Douglas, for your input!
I will be using peer-to-peer software in my computer lab to add more chess sets and clocks to my club. I’ve already spent hundreds of dollars out of my own pocket to get and maintain some nice tournament Excalibur chess sets and Excalibur chess clocks for the club (not to mention medals, plaques, trophies and memberships). We have no more funds. Thanx, Bill, for your input!
Its getting close to the deadline for entering TLAs in the October 15th Tournament Life, so I went ahead and renewed/updated my club’s ad. I only hope that I’ll still be able to offer my members rated events as a certified TD after all is said and done. Thanx, Debra, for your help!
All I can do now is leave it in Mr. Pond’s capable hands, cross my fingers and wait. Thanx, Larry, for your help!
I remain, sincerely yours,
AJG
You have gone way beyond the call of duty! Many tournaments (even some huge ones such as the World Open) expect the players to bring sets, boards, and clocks. I think you could be justified, in cases where neither opponent brings equipment, to tell them they have to use the peer-to-peer software.
Furnishing sets, boards, and especially clocks, is a class act. Your players will appreciate it!
Bill Smythe
Thanx for the kind words, Bill!
BTW, I figured if we had a few sets and others, from outside the club, could bring their own, we’d be in fine shape for larger rated events.
Well, I started 3 years ago with kids that never heard of a chess clock, much less the USCF! Also, the area my students live in has become more and more economically depressed over the years. So they don’t have money to get nice sets for themselves or memberships to the federation - and neither does the school. I suppose I could have run some fund raisers but I just don’t have the patience for it…
Regards,
AJG
Our chess lawyer strikes again.
Come on, Doug. If a Club TD sends in a rating report for a tournament with 60 players, or 70, the delay in getting the tournament rated will be exactly zero. USCF certainly is not about to delay rating the event while it asks nosy questions of the TD. Get over it.
I’m following Terry Winchester’s suggestion, and posting this reply in the conversation where it belongs, not in one which originated as a discussion about a different issue.
Bill Smythe
OK, so I emailed Larry Pond. Larry then emailed Tim Just. Tim then emailed the TDCC and put my extension request to a vote. That’s as far as my petition has gotten as far as I know.
Also, I sent to Tim some suggestions on how to reword some rules in the current rule book regarding what exactly an “established USCF rating” is. I think the TDCC will be discussing such changes later this month at the US Open.
Regards,
AJG
Alleluia, Alleluia! The TDCC, in its infinite wisdom, has voted to give me a 1-year extension for my Club TD Certificate. Thank God! …actually, thanx to the intervention of Larry Pond and Tim Just - thank you, thank you!
OK, so I have 12 months (until Aug. 2005 in fact) to get those 14 OTB classical games required to qualify for the Local TD Exam. We are agreed that the requirement was an Established USCF OTB Classical Rating, right??
I was hoping to start another 3-year term, but 1-year will have to do. Maybe I can find some G/30 tournaments to go to with dual rating. Instead of my usual two 4SS G/60s a year, maybe I can find two 8SS G/30s. Is there such a beast???
Thanx, everyone, for your help!
Regards,
AJG
Glad they gave you a year. Just have a round robin event with three people. As you need a even amount of games, just set up a tournament with eight sections. Just find someone and play eight games with someone like your son, then find a student and play eight games, then you’re son and the student play eight games. It would give you sixteen games, then having seven sections with only seven games per person, would give someone one more white then the other.
If it is a G/30, and if it is paper tournament report, it would be [24 games = (24 x 0.40 = $9.60)] $9.60, if you only report or send in for only one rating fee – the classical. You could send the report as a ‘classical - quick rating’ tournament report for the final cost [24 games = (24 x 0.40 = $9.60 dual rated 2(9.60) = $19.20] of $19.20. If Terry Winchester (sounds like a Winchester rifle a WMD), is correct, ‘you are wasting your money for having this dual rated’: as he did say you should not get credit so save your money.
Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe
Wait a minute, LTDF. Jorge needs to PLAY, not direct, 14 more games. And he already has an established quick rating, so playing in dual-rated events would be pointless.
Bill Smythe
Aren’t you from New York state, just about the most chess-active state in the union? I count about 14 regular-rated tournaments in NY, just during the last half of August, on the USCF website. You should be able to reach your goal within 2 or 3 weeks.
No need for your tournaments to be dual-rated, either, since you already have an established quick rating.
Bill Smythe