Hi all. I hope this question has not been answered on this Forum already; a quick search turned up empty.
Our club might like to run FIDE-rated tournaments, now that the FIDE minimum rating is reduced to 1200. (Or whatever; 1200 was the last report I read.)
What are the requirements for a USCF-rated event to also be FIDE-rated?
Our “club” events consist of one game per week, each Monday, usually for a span of 9-12 weeks. We also run a 5-round Swiss or two each year.
The tournaments are usually listed in a Chess Life TLA, but seldom draw more than a player or two outside of club regulars.
I think we are fine on time control. We play 40/90, with the default secondary control 40/60, and an option of SD/60 if both players agree before the game starts. I have recently begun a campaign to try out increment time control—probably G/90, inc./30—but that’s a tough sell here.
Do we need a certified FIDE arbiter? I am a Local TD and we have one Senior TD who plays but does not direct; he prefers to play a slow game at club meeting nights, then direct other, larger events on weekends.
How much does it cost to get the games FIDE-rated and how much/what kind of advance notice must we give?
Good new ideas, like increment, are a tough sell only if the person selling it is himself not convinced.
Don’t “begin a campaign” or “try it out” – just do it. Announce it in the TLA – G/90 inc/30 or whatever control you choose. As soon as you run your first tournament this way, it will catch on quickly.
Have a backup plan, such as G/115, for games played with non-increment clocks. For those rare clocks (such as older Excaliburs) which are delay-capable but not increment-capable, simply play those games at G/90 d/30.
Um, tournament organizers aren’t supposed to be “educating” players. They are offering a service. If it’s a service the players don’t want, they’re just pounding sand and flexing they’re egos. If you want to try something new, fine. But don’t pretend that it’s the players’ fault if they don’t share your enthusiasm.
Even though FIDE just changed the permissible time controls, I think that’s mostly for norm tournaments. Perhaps Sevan Muradian can correct me if I’m wrong here, but I think as long as you have at least two hours for each player (assuming the game goes 60 moves), then you’re fine. You also need to have no more than twelve hours of play a day, but that’s not a problem from what you’re describing.
FIDE requires you to register the tournament in advance, but in practice, all that means is that you’ll have to mail the TLA to fide@uschess.xxx well in advance (FIDE requires 30 days, but you’ll want to give the USCF office some extra time). Walter Brown told me that he goes through the Grand Prix TLAs in advance enough to put things on the list, but I’m guessing that you won’t be running these as Grand Prix events. USCF requires the chief TD to be at least a senior TD, but since you have one on sight, I don’t think that there would be a problem with him being in a supervisory role over you. I.e. you do all the work, and he’s just there to backstop you in case you make a mistake. Most FIDE-rated events in the U.S. are done under USCF rules, anyway.
As far as cost is concerned, right now USCF charges $60 per section to FIDE-rate an event. Note that this only applies to sections that are FIDE-rated. Also, please note that this may change at the U.S. Open this weekend. Perhaps Mike Nolan can weigh in on this.
Now that I’ve answered as many of your questions as I feel capable of, let me bring up something that you may not have considered. First, how many FIDE-rated players do you have at your club already? If it is fewer than three, then I think this would be a colossal waste of time and money. FIDE doesn’t handle unrateds the way that USCF does. In order to get a FIDE rating, you need to get nine games worth of FIDE rating norms. To get a FIDE rating norm, you need to play at least three FIDE-rated players and score at least one point. This has changed recently, and it is possible in some circumstances to get a norm by scoring less, but my point is that just because FIDE is rating 1200 players doesn’t mean that any 1200 player can get rated by FIDE.
Thanks, Alex. Based on your advice it looks like this idea will go on the back burner for awhile. If we revive it someday I will keep these points in mind, especially the minimum of three FIDE-rated players.
As I read the regs at the FIDE site, as of July 1st the minimum time controls for a FIDE-rated event, based on a game lasting 60 moves, are:
A. Two hours per player if any player in the event is rated 2200+;
B. 90 minutes per player if any player is 1600+ but no one over 2200;
C. One hour per player if there is no 1600+ player in the field.
How often do you figure the last one will happen?
FIDE places stricter limits on time controls for norm-granting tournaments, but that’s not something we will ever need to worry about at our club…
It depends (I love that answer, I use it on my grad students all the time). Time control will be dependent upon the rating of the players. Take a look here - fide.com/fide/handbook?id=66&view=article
The new time controls are for norm tournaments, not non-norm tournaments. It depends
I ran a tournament that was G/60 + 60/sec increments which gives the bare minimum time based on 60 moves since there wasn’t anyone rated over 2200.
Hmm I’ve been told that USCF must register the event, not the individual organizer. When you send the information in to Walter or Chuck, they register it thru the Rating Server and give you back a confirmation number for the registration. I’ve never had success emailing directly the event to FIDE to list.
You have to have a USCF Senior TD onsite, however they have to have access to a FA or IA by telephone at a minimum.
I won’t get into the last sentence of running them under USCF rules. I don’t do that as there are clear differences between USCF and FIDE rules in some important areas.
I have a motion to increase the fees to cover all costs of dealing with FIDE rated tournaments which includes the staff time spent. I believe that’s only fair and anyone looking at running a FIDE tournament knows that it’s a special service being provided.
Very valid points. However you can grow this number exponentially if you do it correctly and utilize a 9R-RR system strategically. As an example, my event was a 9R-RR and there were 4 FIDE rated players and 6 non-FIDE rated players (but were USCF rated). All scored 1 point or more and the non-rated players received FIDE ratings. In a RR the 1 point minimum can be against FIDE rated or unrated playes and doesn’t have to be a win, it can be 2 draws. But if a player scores less than one point the tournament becomes a Swiss and then Swiss tournament rules apply.
Completely agreed in principle, but increment will take time to sink in with many players.
Yes, it’s been around since at least Fischer-Spassky II in 1992 and it’s been accessible to most tournament players since the Chronos started to support increment a few years after that. (No later than 1998, when I bought mine; probably earlier.)
Today, digital clocks are fairly cheap and most can be set easily for increment; it’s standard in most parts of the world, and not just for professional events. See recent Canadian Open.
Tournaments with endless move-based repeating time controls almost don’t exist any more. That eliminates the last argument that sentimentalists—including me, at one time—advanced in favor of analog clocks.
Increment is still a tough sell, even for those who ‘get’ it…mainly due to USCF’s choice to make 5-second delay the standard per-move timing mechanism.
Some players still are not comfortable with delay, many years after it became standard. Within that group you find cutthroat blitz specialists and adrenaline junkies—but there are others, as well.
The “time-per-move” factor throws them. They can deal with Game in XX or YY moves in ZZ minutes; add in a per-move time concept and their mind rejects it. I almost admire the ‘purity’ of this line of thought—but taken to its logical conclusion we would need to abolish clocks completely.
Still, players have adjusted to delay. Increment (of 30 seconds) is another story. *** I *** like the idea, as would most TDs, I suspect.
No insane time scrambles, no ILC claims, no need to watch games for 50-move or repetition, no need to explain the 5-minute rule on scorekeeping since all players keep score all game.
That last one will take some explaining, especially in ‘mixed’ events where the guys at the next board are using delay rather than increment. (The Saitek Competition blue clock, among others, does not support increment.)
Then there is setting the clocks. I know an active, veteran A-player who has owned a Chronos for years and insists there is no way to set it for Fischer mode…
Increment will be something new to most amateur players. I personally like the concept and want to try it out, as player and TD.
So far I have not talked one player at our club into thinking it is a good idea; more accurately, no one sees it as necessary. My argument that players will have to deal with it en route to an IM title does not go over well.
I wish I could talk folks into trying increment. I am pretty sure that won’t happen in these parts until someone does as Bill Smythe suggests: Organize and advertise an increment tournament, giving players a ‘frowned-upon’ last-resort option of delay or analog. If they wished to be frowned-upon, that is.
I would be overjoyed if I never saw a mad time scramble in a Regular-rated game, ever again. That’s my number-one reason in support of increment. That gets through to some players, but only some.
Bobby Fischer made good sense, as long as he stuck to chess. That one gets a chuckle, but it still does not get through…
Those blue Saitek Scholastic clocks ($25 - $30) can be set for delay.
We’ve been using the time control of G-90 + 30 sec (delay or add-on)
for many years now in Oklahoma and everybody LOVES it.
Games are now decided by the pieces instead of the clock.
Score-sheets are mostly complete. Rounds finish on time.
Frank K. Berry
Maybe Sevan can chime in on this – are there any requirements on the minimum number of rounds for a Swiss to be FIDE-rated? Our association is looking at FIDE-rating our Closed Championship which is scheduled for 4 rounds at G/120.
I don’t think so. If you’re trying to get new players rated, certainly fewer than three is not useful, but might be allowed. Four rounds is certainly fine, though not for GM/IM norms, of course. Those require nine rounds. Not an issue for most small organizers.
FIDE is apparently in the process of limiting what time controls are FIDE ratable, having already done so for what time controls can be used for events at which FIDE norms can be earned, with more limits to come.
