If you are talking about a form for internal use between USCF and FIDE, fine. If you are suggesting that tournament organizers should have to fill out such a (very complex) form, not fine. A concept the USCF seems to have trouble with is that it is up to you to please your customers, not vice versa.
I do not see this as a ‘pleasing the customers’ issue, I see this as a ‘complying with FIDE regulations’ issue.
Moreover, the ultimate ‘customers’ here are the FIDE rated players, and getting the darned paperwork RIGHT is what they want, they really don’t care what the arbiter, the organizers, the USCF or even FIDE has to do to accomplish that.
They want their titles as soon as possible after they’re earned and they want their FIDE events rated on time and accurately.
The USCF does a bad job of this at present, FIDE doesn’t do all that great a job with it either.
I don’t see FIDE making the regulations easier, in fact they are tightening them somewhat, as in the near future rating reports will require the date of EACH ROUND.
FIDE also wants the color of each game, though I received permission in Torino for us to use a dummy entry until such time that we can modify our internal reporting procedures to include that information. (We have a space for that information in our database already, as I was anticipating this requirement.)
I think we can make the job of ACCURATELY reporting that additional information easier with some techology and tools.
This is not an issue of pleasing customers. An organizer is just as much as a stakeholder here as is the USCF. This is not a customer-vendor relationship but a partnership relationship.
If the organizer is going through the additional steps and costs to make the event FIDE rated (or to carry norms) then the organizer needs to have responsibility for finishing the job. The forms are not that complex. Are they somewhat time consuming? Maybe. If Mike is able to create an automated system though that helps in this matter then I think it would help everyone.
One thing I would personally like to see is some mapping between USCF members/ID’s and their FIDE ID’s. It would be nice if during an MSA search that the person’s FIDE ID, title, and federation would show up.
–Sevan
FIDE ID, country of registry and FIDE title is on the ‘general’ tab on the MSA member screen, I think it would be cumbersome to try to show that much additional information on the ‘search’ page, especially since less than 1% of the players in the USCF database have a FIDE ID.
Also, there is this link on the ratings page, which shows the approximately 2600 players in our database who either have both a USCF and a FIDE ID or who have a FIDE ID and are listed as ‘USA’ on the FIDE rating list: uschess.org/fide_match.php
(Usually a player who is listed as ‘USA’ but without a USCF ID is one that we haven’t matched up against our records yet, a task that the office needs to work on every quarter when the new FRL comes out.)
If there are corrections to the FIDE-to-USCF list, please send them to fide@uschess.org.
One of the things I learned while in Turin is that FIDE is finally going to stop issuing new FIDE IDs to players who already have a FIDE ID. FIDE has been doing this for various reasons, such as when a player changes his or her country of registry. (There are some players who have had four or five FIDE IDs over time.)
FIDE is also giving the FIDE Ratings Officer for each member federation access to a screen which will allow the USCF office to assign new FIDE IDs to players and to make corrections, such as correcting the name and birthdate.
I disagree. Attempting to “automate” such things is an evasion of the USCF’s responsibilities. With few exceptions, organizers do not deal with FIDE – only national federations do. It is up to the national federation, not the organizer, to put rating reports and title norms in proper form. The system currently in place is adequate, provided the USCF hires and trains enough staff to do the job.
Actually you are wrong regarding the norm forms. The national federation reviews the forms for completeness and submits the forms however it is the arbiter of the event that will generate 4 copies of each norm report.
1.8 Title Tournament Certificates
The Chief Arbiter must prepare in quadruplicate certificates of title results achieved. These copies must be provided to the player, the players federation, the organizing federation and the FIDE Office. The player is recommended to ask the Chief Arbiter for the certificate before leaving the tournament. (GA04)
fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0101
Also what is wrong with having an online form where I as an organizer can submit the tournament information to USCF so they can in turn submit it to FIDE for registration of the event?
If the automated system is also capable of extracting information from a PTO file to help generate the FIDE rating report then I don’t see an issue.
This is not skirting responsibility or duties. This is the USCF getting more effecient and using limited resources more effectively.
Perhaps you recommend also that we get rid of WinTD and SwissSys and go back to pairing cards since you are against automation? That will be fun, pairing cards for tournaments with hundreds of players.
–Sevan
I think that using pairing cards helped me to learn how to make pairings much more thoroughly than if I had never had the benefit of working with them, and only relied on the computer to do them instead. After I while, I was able to cut the deck of a large scoregroup pile almost exactly in half the first time (at the MOST I would miscut it so there might be up to three excess cards in the larger half). I didn't like the "Official USCF Pairing Cards" though, they were too long, relative to their width(becasue they had space for the player's address, and other unnecessary info), making them awkward to handle quickly. The CCA pairing cards were exactly the right size and thickness for swift shuffling and flipping, and when the tournament was over, the back of the used pairing cards could be reused for board numbers at the next tournament.
Despite their reuseability, in the 1986 National High School Championship (in Valley Forge, PA), when the tournament was over we took all the pairing cards and scattered them all around the motel (but mostly on the parked cars).
I have. Several times, including two U.S. Opens. It wasn’t fun.
According to the norm reporting form, available on the FIDE website at fide./com/official/handbook/ … %20IT1.pdf
the organizer is supposed to prepare four copies of the form.
One goes to the player, one goes to the player’s home federation (for players from another country), one goes to the organizing federation (IE, the USCF for a tournament held in the USA), and one goes to the FIDE office.
The player is supposed to receive his copy while at the tournament, though Carol Jarecki has told me that sometimes they don’t recognize that a norm has been earned until the player has left.
It isn’t clear from the form whether the organizer is expected to send copies to the USCF office for forwarding on to the player’s home federation and to the FIDE office, though I think the USCF generally does handle the former, though sometimes quite badly.
There are places on the form for both the Arbiter’s signature and the Federation officer’s signature. I think the practice in the USCF is for the FIDE Ratings Officer (currently Walter Brown or Ernie Schlich) to review the norm, sign it and forward a copy on to FIDE.
This illustrates part of the problem. As I understand it FIDE only recognizes a norm if it is confirmed by the organizing federation, and does a matchup of the copies of any forms received directly from the organizer and from the sponsoring federation.
Further, when a federation is applying for a title for a player, copies of the norm certificates must be included.
If these forms are being faxed back and forth, they get harder to read with each retransmission.
This is a system which DESPERATELY needs to be automated by FIDE, and I think we can start by automating some of what happens at the USCF office.
I am not trying to make life harder for organizers of FIDE rated events in the US, but until FIDE gets a better system in place it will probably represent a little extra effort. such as filling out a web form in addition to the four copies of the norm certificate. However, this should pay off in better tracking of norms by the USCF office, including confirmation of norms from the rating report and a web-based directory of norms earned.
The idea of just throwing more warm bodies at every problem is what has been wrong with the USCF for the last 20+ years, and was why the USCF had grown to over 50 employees by the summer of 2003, with a payroll of over $1.5 million. In some respects, history is repeating itself, as the USCF payroll has been growing again in the last year and a half.
This is bogus on the part of the organizer and arbiter re: not knowing if a norm was scored or not. If they are doing their job and paying attention this should not happen.
I think the logic is quite clear here. The Arbiter and/or Organizer complete the form and sign it. The form requires the Arbiter signature. Then the Arbiter sends to USCF. The norm form is invalid unless the federation signature AND the arbiter signature are on there. Why would you as the organizer / arbiter delay the process of having all required signatures?
If the process can be automated in some fashion then it helps expedite the process instead of delaying it.
It’s not a quibble it’s efficiency. Also if we wanted to we could argue that the rules from FIDE does NOT require the national federation to submit the result if the Chief Arbiter had pre-registered the event with FIDE:
Handbook | B. Permanent Commissions | 01. International Title Regulations (Qualification Commission) | 1.0. Requirements for the titles designated in 0.31. Rules 1.92 and 1.93 talks about this.
–Sevan
I would venture that I’m not alone amongst players not pursuing FIDE norms to have a rather limited knowledge of the basic FIDE requirements. If other posters can assist I’d appreciate it (the FIDE website is not user-friendly).
Here’s my “understanding” (which probably contains more than a few inaccuracies):
Core Requirements: A minimum of 2 (or is it 3?) FIDE norms achieved from a minimum of a 27(?) FIDE-rated games. Norm tournaments must be a minimum of 9-rounds. Must face a minimum of three foreign players in a 9-round tournament (not sure if it’s still a 33% requirement for a tournament of > 9-rounds; e.g., how many foreign opponents are required for a 14-round tournament?). Exception: A country’s national championship is exempt from the foreign opponents requirement.
Performance Rating:
2600: GM (min 2500 FIDE rating + must face at least 3 GM opponents in 9-round tournament).
2500: IM (must also attain a 2400 FIDE rating)
?: FM
?: WGM
2300: WIM
?: WFM
Questions:
-
How are FIDE performance ratings calculated? Is it something like Draw = Opponent’s rating; Win = Rating + 400; Loss = Rating - 400?
-
Is the performance rating calculation changed if you face an opponent w/ a FIDE rating under 2200? I could see how even winning the game might not help an IM seeking a GM-norm.
-
What is the fastest time-control for FIDE-norms? Does an incremental time-control change that minimum?
-
Do FIDE-rated matches not qualify, even if it is between foreign players?
-
Is there an “Expiration date” (such as a set #years) on achieved norms?
Take a look at the following link - it’s a performance calculator from FIDE’s website - ratings.fide.com/calculators.phtml
Increment does change the picture. The fastest currently used that I know of is G/90 + 30/sec increment. I’ve had some conversations on G/60 + 60/sec increment. Idea is that there should be a total of 120 minutes of think time based on 60 moves. I’ve also had the conversations of G/5 + 120/sec increment. That conversation didn’t go far 
From FIDE’s website:
1.14 Without an increment of a minimum of 30 seconds for each move, the minimum time is 2 hours and 30 minutes. (GA 04) With an increment of a minimum of 30 seconds for each move, the minimum time is 120 minutes in which to complete all the moves, based upon a game lasting 60 moves. 1.14a Examples of standard chess include: All the moves in 90 minutes, but for each move a player receives an extra 30 seconds added to his clock time. 40 moves in two hours, followed by all the moves in one hour. 40 moves in two hours, 20 moves in one hour, followed by all the moves in 30 minutes. 40 moves in two hours, 20 moves in one hour, followed by 15 minutes plus 30 seconds per move to finish the game. (GA04)
FIDE rated matches cannot be used for matches. It’s in section 1.6 (fide.com/info/handbook?id=58&view=article)
Not any more. There used to be.
From FIDE’s website:
1.50e Title results remain valid for life. Thus there is no time restriction imposed on obtaining norms.
Was this made retroactive? I.e., if a player had a norm that expired, did it, well, come back to life when FIDE made this change?
Unfortunately not.
Sevan: Thanks for the fast response! I didn’t think my questions might be answered for a day or two.
Anyone know what FIDE performance ratings are needed for:
FM-norm?
WGM-norm?
WFM-norm?
No such thing as FM norms or WFM norms. You have to have had a published rating of 2300 for the FM title and 2100 for the WFM title.
Here is the performance rating charge from FIDE:
1.48 Performance Rating (Rp)
In order to achieve a norm, a player must perform at a level at least of that shown below:
Minimum level prior to rounding After rounding
GM 2600.5 2601
IM 2450.5 2451
WGM 2400.5 2401
WIM 2250.5 2251
Wow! Blitz out the opening, and you’re home free.
Bill Smythe
I believe so. At the U.S. Championship last year Joe Bradford told me that he had gotten two IM norms that had expired, but when he got his third IM norm, he was informed that he was an IM-elect.
Alex Relyea
Joe has 4 norms on his application. 1 from 2007, 1 from 2006, 1 from 1986 and 1 from 1982. The 1986 one may not have been re-activated but was ok.
When I spoke to FIDE they told me that it wasn’t retroactive. I’ve sent out an email asking for clarification on this.
If this is accurate (and the person that I spoke to in FIDE was wrong) that the norms get reactivated, then that changes the picture for a local Chicago player who thinks a GM norm he earned expired.
I just received confirmation that norms did come back to life when this rule change happened around 2003.
So that is actually great news!