How do you get scholastic players to take notation???

Running Chess Tournaments
21

15D3: Compliance. The opponent is urged to comply with such a request, but this is not mandatory. If the opponent denies the request, the player may stop both clocks and see a director. A director who agrees that the request is appropriate shall instruct the opponent to lend the player the scoresheet. The opponent may not refuse, as all scoresheets belong to the organizers. See also 15G. Ownership of scoresheets.

15G: Ownership of scoresheets. The scoresheets of all games in a tournament are the property of the sponsoring organization(s). If the organizer requires that a copy of each game score be smitted by the players, duplicate scoresheets must be provided, and players who fail to submit scoresheets may be penalized.

If the player is asking for a scoresheet, the opponent should not have a problem given his opponent the scoresheet when it is their opponents turn on the clock, and the scoresheet if it is borrowed should have his opponents time used. As in some events, a person will not write down their moves just to have his opponent lose time when it is his opponents time on the clock, just to make his opponunt lose time on the clock. As some players will not make a move when they know what their move will be till the opponent returns the scoresheet.

15D4. Exessive requests. Repeated requests of this type may be deemed by the director to be inappropriate, and the offender may be penalized under 20G, Annoying behavior prohibited.

If as a director, will look at the age of both players: if the person is a scholastic player will give more slack as they are new to chess. If it is a scholastic player, and they do not know how to do notation well, might inform the player that if he wish that a copy of the game will be given at the end of the game. If on the other hand, the player does know how to do notation or it is unclear if the person knows notation, and the player is asking a great deal of the time on the subject of borrowing would be willing to use rule 20G.

At this time, with all the events that myself have been the director, or been to a event were a person has made any claim of annoying behavior of repeated requests. Even that rule 20G could be used, it would fall under 20G1. Inadvertent annoying behavior. The best the director can do would be a warning, if it happens again the director can give stronger penalties.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, Local TD
12313120

22

In tournaments sponsored by the VA Scholastic Chess Assn, we have clear rules on this matter. Kids in 3rd grade and below are “encouraged” to take notation, but not required. Players in 4th grade and above are required. TDs impose time penalties when they don’t follow the rules. You can see our “rules” at: vschess.org/rules/VSCARules.htm

Mike Hoffpauir, VSCA :slight_smile:

23

It seems we have two issues here:

1) Teaching/encouraging kids to take notation during rated games

2) Forcing kids to take notation during rated games

While the first issue is a matter for parents and coaches/teachers, and has plenty of room for debate and discussion about training styles, I don’t the see the second issue as presenting a real problem. It’s an issue for TDs, and the solution is simple. Whether the player in question is a minor or an adult, any player who refuses to keep score during a rated tournament should have to forfeit the game, and if the player refuses to keep score in a second game, expulsion from the tournament should be the punishment.

If that sounds too harsh for some TDs, then I suggest holding non-rated tournaments for the slackers. When those players are ready to enter the world of personal responsibility and keep score, they can play in the real tournaments with the big boys and girls.

Speaking of slackers, what’s with these players who show up for rated tournaments with no USCF ID card, no set, no board, no clock, and no pen/pencil? The sad part is that adults are the worst offenders. I can see an unrated player being unprepared, but tournament veterans should know better. Grrr… :imp:

O.K., that concludes my diatribe. :wink:

24

Rule 13 I. is clear. “The director may declare the game lost by a player who refuses to comply with the rules…”

25

Exactly. Rule 13I., in conjunction with Rule 15A., is all you need to deal with the problem (taking Rules 15A1. and 35. into consideration, of course).

Also, regarding Rule 15A1c. (“Beginners who have not learned to keep score may be excused from scorekeeping, at the director’s discretion.”), I would choose not to excuse beginners in a regular Swiss tournament. If they are that green, they need to start with something smaller, like a closed round robin among friends and/or fellow local club members. In my opinion, if you’re ready to play in an open Swiss, you’re ready to keep score (and you’re also ready to BYOE). Keep in mind, the rule uses the term “beginner,” not “child” or “minor,” so this has nothing to do with age. Children can learn to keep score just as easily as they can learn to play.

26

Back with the children and notation, have seen a number of times at a USCF rated event the child not even use a scoresheet, or even place after each move a X in the scoresheet. Even let the children not even use a scoresheet in my events without even taking the time off the clock. With all the events I have been the director have gone over a very few of the games after the tournament, then never even published or let see someone see a game from any or my events if it was not played by myself. Think of it this way, if you have children that have no or little understanding of notation – do you think the game is worth to be published.

Even gotten word that a director even let the scholistic section not even need scoresheets or a clock for his rated event. A scoresheet will wave but a clock will not.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
12313120

27

Is there any legitimate reason for a child to avoid keeping score in an open tournament?

In my opinion, learning how to play chess is more difficult than learning how to keep track of moves, so there’s really no excuse for not keeping score. Handicaps aside, if a player can do one, he can do the other. The difference is that kids see the game itself as play and keeping score as work. Most kids will avoid whatever they are allowed to avoid (adults will too, but they don’t usually receive the same misplaced sympathy).

I think we do children a disservice by allowing them to eat the icing and leave the cake, so-to-speak. The sooner they learn that clocks, score sheets, sportsmanship, and rules are part of tournament play, the better. If all you want is to teach a child the game itself, rated competition isn’t necessary. Competitive chess has the potential to be a classroom for teaching children a variety of general lessons about life, including respect, responsibility, obligation, dedication, sportsmanship, maturity, and introspection, but none of these lessons will be learned if we don’t teach them.

Mr. Forsythe asks, “Think of it this way, if you have children that have no or little understanding of notation – do you think the game is worth to be published.” I counter with the question, “Why do these children have little or no understanding of notation?” If a coach/teacher/parent brings a kid to a rated tournament, that kid should be equipped with the basic knowledge of how the chessmen move, how to use a clock, how to keep score, etc. Children who don’t know these things simply are not ready for rated tournaments. Children who know these things and aren’t held accountable when they refuse to comply become brats.

Mr. Zeitler began this topic with the following question:

The source of the problem is with the adults, not the children. I think TDs have an obligation to see to it that their chess tournaments are run like chess tournaments, not daycare centers. Likewise, parents have to realize that they are bringing their children to chess tournaments, not Chuck E. Cheese’s, and the children must be made aware that they will comply with the rules or they won’t be allowed to participate. It all starts with the TDs. Make the players keep score, or send them home. Sometimes, we must tell people things they need to hear, even when they don’t want to hear them.

28

Do you mean an “Open tournament” as relates to primarily an “Adult” tournament?

Apart from disabilities, or religious reasons, YES/MAYBE/NO! I realize that this departs,somewhat, from the opinion in my earlier reply, BUT,

the fact is that as a result of “The source of the problem is with the adults, not the children”, many children of very young age simply do not know how to take notation, and requiring them to attempt to keep score may cause more secondary distraction than primary. Continued badgering by the TD can cause more of a disruption to the tournament than simply allowing the beginner, who has not learned to take notation, to avoid taking notation.

I do agree with the premise that all children should be taught every element of tournament chess, and when they are not, it is the fault of the coach. With this in mind, I do not believe we should be ever so harsh on the child who really does wish to play in tournaments. Indeed, the success of all tournaments, and especially many small tournaments, depends on the participation of our youth. I don’t believe I would want to exclude a player from participating in my event, simply because he can’t/hasn’t learned to take noation. BUT (again),

Tim Just referred to a TD Tip which allows the TD to subtract time from the clock of a player who is excused from taking notation (This is on p. 56 of the 5th edition). In my opinion, depending upon the time control, a 5% deduction may not be enough of a time penalty. What’s a 4.5 minute deduction in a G/:90 tournament going to do to serve as equanimity? Perhaps the TD needs to deduct even more time, (equal to 1/2 the tc), say maybe up to 45 minutes in a G/:90. Perhaps this is what is needed to convince a coach, who wants their student to play in tournaments, to teach their student to take notation.

All-in-all, I’d say that there has to be some sort of penalty, perhaps only in the time factor, for a player excused from taking notation. But, be aware that most of these children are sporting ratings of mere Class E, and most times, I would say that a child in this rating class isn’t going to retain an edge in concentration sufficient enough to beat a higher rated opponent.

The problem I see is “… with the adult coaches/parents”, and we have to come up with a solution to that problem. Of course, as a TD/Organizer, you may legally withdraw a player from the tournament who refuses to take notation, or you may simply not accept their registration, but I think this may be a bit too harsh. Let them play, speak to their coaches/parents, subtract time from their clocks, but try not to allow this to affect you (as a TD) too much.

As to Mr. Forsythe’s “Think of it this way, if you have children that have no or little understanding of notation – do you think the game is worth to be published.”, the publication of the game is not the reason for the rule. Scorekeeping is required, in part, to be able to facillitate rulings on certain claims.

Just my opinion,

-Terry Winchester

29

If there was a child that I have wants to play chess, not so much a child that the parents want their child to play chess. If they are around the age of 10 to 17 will find the time to teach them notation and the use of the clock. Yes, children will play chess at different ages, the reason I pick the age group of 10 to 17 for the reason I try to talk to them as adults not as little children.

Have found some in the past and do hope will find them again: will spend the time to play a rated game with them. First start out with something like a quick rated event, with this need one other person so after the event they would have a established rating. After that see to it they go to a open tournament were they can play other players, not so much my events but other directors events as they will start to learn more of the ropes of a event. If I am the director would not have the time to spend with him between rounds, this is the reason to take him/her to a different event.

In time will even spend the time if there is the amount of time to play a event at G/30, this will give the child some understanding of the basic temperment at a event. Most coaches do not like or want to play with their students in a reated game, can understand if they lose to their student once might lose a customer. If someone can spend the time on a one on one match, teaching the clock and the notation will give greater help then teaching the students the move of the board. Clock managment, notation, and the feel of a tournament hall, their personal likes and dislikes of short or longer time controls only are learned at a tournament not from a book or from a coach.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
12313120

30

In a scholistic tournament, even if the players did keep perfect score on both sides, not that many or can say have a scholistic player go to the director and ask about a ruling – other then checkmate, check, stalemate. Would never have or know of any time a scholistic tournament that had more then one time control – therefore the use of a scoresheet to prove the player did or did not make their first time control.

With a scholistic touranament, most players will know how to use the scoresheet and others have little idea of it. Finding a way to force the player to use notation or even take time off their clock only makes the player feel bad, even to the point they stop going to a tournament and withdraw their renewel to the federation. Most parents never even read the USCF official rules of chess or even own a copy, if you think a child can read and understand the rule book would have to say no. Were are in these forms debating the meaning of the rule book and we are adults that have years under their belts in active tournaments – if we have problems understanding all the rules how are you going to ask a 5 year old child to have a better understanding.

Only a small percent of the scholistic players are going to be active tournament players in early adulthood, and out of them only a few would be life time members to the federation. If you are harsh to the players they will stop going to your events, if you say that you will get the same from other directors you will find the parents will not renew the childs membership. It is not the scholistic players that renews their membership its the parents.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td
12313120

31

This is a reasonable approach. I know that, as a coach, I have students who can’t take notation and yet want to play. If the TD wanted to deduct time off their clock, I can see how it may help. It might even motivate them to learn how to play chess and take notation at the same time.

But at the same time, there is going to be a very high frustration level for them. After all, most scholastic tournaments are G/30, and trying to stay in those time limits and play a good game while keeping score isn’t something they are always capable of doing. Very good players who don’t keep score will start losing games in this time frame when required to do so. They may be able to handle it when playing at G/45, but there really is a problem for those players who aren’t capable of doing it at G/30. What happens then is we get students dropping out of chess, not finding it worthwhile to continue.

Of course, the better players are able to do it, and I always point out to my students that my son is able to play good chess while taking notation in a G/30 tourney, but then I realize he’s more talented than some of them. OTOH, another star player gets distracted by taking score, but only when palying in G/30 tourneys.

I would rather have a student play in a tournament, earn prizes, and feel good about himself, than be hampered by having to keep score in a G/30 tourney and possibly drop out because of it. This is not to say I don’t teach them how to take notation, or not emphasize it, but if they play a lot better by not keeping score, than I want them to have that chance.

Radishes

32

There is a different idea for notation for scholastic players, as scholastic players do play faster then adults even if they were even in a G/30 or slower time control. True there are the few that would use all there required time to make there moves – if they have came up with the skill on time managment they would also have learned the skill of natation: these students are the exception.

If you are a coach that has a event that you are having rated, then knowing that a number of your students will have problems taking notation, or having the amount of time to spend to take care of there notation – as some have said they would get upset and lose. Why not have the event be a quick event and set the time control at G/29. Most directors would never want to have a quick event for a scholastic event as the common goal for a player is to get a established classical rating then a established quick rating; most players or even most coachs never bother to care what a persons quick rating is, or more to the point do not care to even have a quick rating.

Even if you do have it set at G/30 you are still going to send in your report to have the event duel rated, no matter what happens the scholastic player will get a classical and quick rating. As a number of the rank and file are learning slow but sure that events betwen G/30 and G/60 are now duel rated, does place a great importance on the director to have the event rated for both.

If you do have scholastic players, most of them would want more games then fewer games of chess. As never seeing a scholastic event with two time controls, as G/120 and SD/60. Scholastic players would like the faster time control and the parents would like there child or children to have more games of chess. Yes it is the final demand on the director and organizer of the event dealing with the time control.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

33

Suggesting a G/:29 for the sole purpose of excluding scorekeeping? Why don’t we (the coaches) just teach the kids to take notation? There’s really no reason to fuss over this. Notation is a part of tournament play. If people are going to play in tournaments, they need to learn to take notation. It’s just that simple!

34

Yes it is up to the coach and the parents if they want there child or children to learn chess. The reason for a G/29 would take care of the problem of notation – some players think quick event as a pure wast of time. The fact of the matter, notation can even give adults problems – like the chess board notation shows “H” as the first letter from their left side of the board when they have white. Number of times, a player asked to have the board turned 180 degrees just because of the notation. The board is set up right, the queen is on her own color, would love to see the day of having a floppy chess board without the notation.

There is a market for having chess board with the notation, showing the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, going from left to right for white; then the letters H, G, F, E, D, C, B, A, going from left to right for black. If adults are having problems with notation, as it is making a market for a chess board with notation as a aid for the player – gives a basic question, why are we asking scholastic players to have a better understanding of notation if adults are having problems also. If adults have a problem with notation that they need help from the side of the board, are we not harsh for the scholastic player.

If you look at scholastic players, the very young, how many of these children write the word NO when they should write the word KNOW, or use the word THERE when they should use the word THEIR. Notation takes a great deal of time to learn, as notation is so plastic as example (Bf6, B:f6, Bxf6) each way is legal for showing a capture, each way used is up to the person – then again books have different format to show a capture.

Do not be so hard on the scholastic player on notation, as we know there are few players that need the help of the board for notation – how many can not function well when the board is backwards only because the notation on the side of the board is backwards. The coach can teach the student(s) notation, if we are asking them to know the notation as good as a adult: then we are telling the scholastic player that a few of them will need the help from the notation chess board.

Most scholastic players will drop out of chess, only a few will stay with tournament chess into adulthood, then only a few will stay into tournament chess as a senior citizen. Can understand the dream of a coach to find the next Bobby Fisher – if a coach goes into that mind set only will drive the scholastic player away from chess and make the parents feel the pain of the child. It would be nice if all scholastic players understand notation: with making all the players understand notation only drive the ones that needs time to understand notation or special help from the parents not from only the coach. The best way the scholastic player will learn chess is from the parents, only the coach can show the child and parents better skills.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

35

I have been talking specifically about scholastic tournaments. In my area, most scholastic tournaments are not USCF-rated,and this is fine for the many kids who want to play but don’t or can’t spend the money for membership. I therefore question if USCF rules would even be considered enforceable at these events. The time conttrol is G/30, and the kids tend to play fast even when they don’t need to.

Hmmm, maybe having them take notation would help slow them down. There’s a thought.

Anyway, when was the last time you heard the TD at a regular tournament announce that everyone had to take notation? Sure, maybe it’s a given, but who’s going to complain if their opponent doesn’t, and will the TD have nothing better to do than to patrol the players to see who is or isn’t?

I’m beginning to think notation should be optional at any tournament, since it benefits the player, and if the player chooses to ignore or give up these benefits, then the player is already hurting himself. Certain rights are given up, for example, plus the inability to go over a game later on. Who does benefit when a player takes notation anyway? The player! Why should the USCF be concerned about this at all?

Radishes

36

Dear Radishes:

So correct to understand that scholastic players do play faster then adults – they move because the see a threat or feel there is a threat when there is or is not a threat to their king or some material.

The reason for pointing out a quick event for scholastic players – as most scholastic players will be done with their game with less then 15 minutes used on their clock no matter how much time you did give them for the game, like G/30 or G/60 or G/90. As most players would say the quick rating is their funny rating and there classical rating is the most important rating. Why not start a scholastic player with a quick event, save on teaching all the players notation, when you do find the ones that understand notation – then take them to a regular event – after you feel they have a understanding of the game of chess.

If having a child of my own, would only start him/her into a event around the age of ten, would skip the scholastic section for the first few years untill the child learns the skills and good conduct at a chess event. As having seen scholastic events that is more like a ‘day care center’ then a chess tournament; this is the reason for not wanting to be the director of a scholastic event – as there being way to many young males that had way too many cans of soda pop; then having annoyed parents when you tell their child to calm down. This is the reason when talking to parents about chess to avoid scholastic events, as scholastic events will only make their child be a poorer player.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

37

An organizer/TD may, at his/her discretion, in an unrated event, abolish any USCF rule, including the en-passant capture, the o-o-o, the pawns move two squares on the first move, or all of the USCF rules. The organizer can even play the game as tidly-winks, if he/she so chooses. But it ain’t chess.

If, on the other hand, the organizer/TD wishes to enforce the rules of chess, the organizer/TD may do so. All rules are enforceable, if the organizer/TD so chooses.

This is a coach issue. The TD should not concern himself with how fast the players conduct the game. The TD is there to enforce the Rules of Chess.

June 12, 2004

Unless the players complain, the TD should not intervene to enforce this rule. It may cause more harm, as the player taking notation may not even care that his/her opponent isn’t.

A scoresheet is needed for the TD to be able to verify certain claims, such as the opponent failing to make time control, to prove that a draw has been made, etc. These are, I agree, player benefits, and the player who fails to take notation correctly may lose the ability to make these claims. However, the organizer also has a right to copies of the games played in his/her tournament. In that case, it is an organizer issue. Perhaps the most important reason is that some players wish to record their game - these players not only have the duty to record, they also have an absolute right to record their games in rated tournaments. In that case, the player’s opponent must also be required to take notation. Otherwise, the non-recording player gains an advantage in concentration. This would be unfair to the player who wants to record.

In any event, unless and until USCF decides to abolish this rule, TDs are bound to enforce it (and all other rules) at the events they direct.

As I said above, in unrated events, organizers and TDs have the right to modify, or repeal, any USCF tournament rule. This doesn’t make it right, however.

-Terry Winchester
Evansville, IN

38

Dear evansvillecc:

Players unable to keep score
15A1c Beginners who have not learned to keep score may be excused from scorekeeping, at the director’s discretion.

If someone is new to chess and does not understand notation: will let the player not take notation then will take five percent from the time off their clock; if on the other hand both players do not understand notation why take the time off both players clock – as the reason for taking time off a players clock was to give a balance between one player that does scorekeeping and the other not. If one board has both players do not use scorekeeping will not effect the other boards during the round even if all the other boards do use scorekeeping.

You talk about the tournament director or the organizer wanting to keep and study the games after the event: most tournament directors do not care to take the scoresheets home and study all the games – as even the ones were both players are class C or higher in rating do and will have ‘cooks’ in their games. There is nothing to say that a person will not make a error in their scorekeeping and only found out after the game is finnished. Would or could say be impressed to look at board one during the final round of the event or some game that I thought was important for personal reasons; wanting to look at all the games do not have the time or engery even to study all the games of my books with titled players.

It is up to the players if they want to make a claim of a rule – it is not the director or the other players to make a rule claim. Most players that know the other player has made a error with the rules and the player noticed their error would be past over. Like a player that plays a game of blitzs noticed the other players clock expired, would still want to play out the game even that they know they won the game and even let their clock time expire also.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

39

I still like the faster than G/30 approach.

So, I don’t require game scores. I try to have some rated events at my high school chess club. The only time we use notation is before a tourney when we have a little lesson on the PC projector (I project positions and ask them to find a fork or a pin or mate or best move or …). BTW, I use xboard in linux to save positions ahead of time.

We just don’t have the time to complete a tournament with time controls of G/30 or slower. We tend to have 3 round quads at G/15 (1.5 hours) or octos at G/10 (1 hour + a little pairing time between rounds) so we can finish a whole event in the time we are allotted for one meeting each week.

Regards,
AJG

40

Would not let everyone use 15A1c just to let all the players not use scoresheets, as scoresheets are needed to improve the skill of the player. Teaching the students to use scoresheets is important, as they will be in other tournaments when you are not the director. If they are having problems with notation – then it is fine to take the time off the clock – if both do not know notation then keep the time. If they know notation then they should use notation.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td