Just curious what other tournament organizers do for scholastic time controls. We recently ran a tournament divided by high school, middle school, elementary school, primary school and within those, ratings breaks. The elementary group was broken into 4 sections with the highest having the rating range 1200-2000 (mostly 1200-1400 with a couple outliers). They played G/55 d5. There was also a middle school section and high school section with rating ranges around 1100-1300 that played the same schedule. Due to the length of those games, we can only fit 4 games in during the day. Lower rated sections play 5 games throughout the day on a G/30 d5 or G/45 d5 schedule. Higher rated sections also play 5 games at G/85 d5 on a two day schedule.
It would be nice for everyone to get 5 games but that means a faster time control or expanding those sections to a two day schedule which would probably cause many of those players not to attend.
So, in general, can people post what time controls they use for various ratings? Does age also have an impact on your decision there?
My scholastic events are almost always G/30 d/5, one day events. That’s what the players want. The higher rated scholastic players will play in “adult” sections with longer time controls.
Generally, our club runs most of its events as Game 45, d5 on selected Saturdays. We can do only four rounds as we have a tight time frame and have to be out of the building, a church annex, by 6 pm. We have put a little extra time between rounds and a break for lunch. Our rounds are usually 10 am - 11:45 am - 1:45 pm - 3:30 pm with awards at around 5:15 pm. This gives us about 45 minutes to put the sets, boards, and clocks away, put the tables and chairs back in order, and do clean up. While many games are done within one hour, there are always a few that take up the whole of the time control. The time controls are not selected by age, but because of the overall time constraints. We get players from 100 to master level at our events.
While the majority of the participants are kids, they are informed that our events are not scholastic tournaments. The players are not only expected but actively encouraged to use more time as well as write out their moves as best as they can. Because of the nature of the site, a church, we emphasize that the players behave well and not treat the event like it is recess. That includes the adults who are reminded of their use of language in the church and around kids. Respect for each other and sportsmanship are high priorities.
We do hold one Game 30, d5 per year, which is 5 rounds. Adults show up to that tournament, too, because they like the site we have. We are experimenting in May with a 3 round, Game 60, d10 event for ratings to see if players will come to an event that is only $6 and just gives out door prizes for participation. This fills the suggestion of some of the players for a longer time control. We expect to get a few more adults to this type of event. It will also help to wean some of the kids off the fast Game 30 scholastic tournaments. I have found that Game 30 can help discover talent, but usually does not enhance that talent over time. Young players grow better when they start using more time and play in events with adults at slower time controls. This helps them to overcome fears of playing adults. I will not organize ASAP tournaments as it tends to reward low quality of play as well as reinforcing tendencies of ADHD. I wish we could hold 2 day events, but we can’t.
The Illinois K-8 State Championship is held over two days. It does not deter attendance. Possibly quite the opposite in fact. There are a few that have played just a single day with “byes” for all rounds on either the first or second day. We actually use 7 rounds for this event. There are four separate sections: K-1, K-3, K-5, and K-8. The sections are only grouped by grade and not by rating. Though there are class based trophies in each section.
The 4-5 and 6-8 grade section play under G/55;d5. The 2-3 grade section uses G/40;d5 and the K-1 section uses G/25;d5.
Since everyone plays 7 rounds regardless we could have everyone with G/55;d5, but the younger kids tend to play so fast they’d just be sitting around for an extra hour needlessly.
Some organizers have this fear of kids sitting around after finishing early and therefore we must pair them ASAP. My experience is that the kids fill in the extra time by playing blitz and bughouse rather than sit waiting for another game. Some of the chess moms also appreciate knowing that their kids are playing at a fixed time allowing them time to run out to get food or run errands. Most of them do not push to finish the tournament early, but if you create this hectic atmosphere rather than have fixed scheduling, then you get everyone rushed, not knowing when the rounds are. Both parents and players need to learn some patience. Some organizers who shovel the kids in and out as fast as they can are in it for the money and do not care about the kids learning and developing social skills. It is debatable how much learning is going on in an event that has 5 rounds and an award ceremony in only 3 hours.
Our state scholastic championship runs on a two day, 5 round, Game 90 d5 schedule. We do have one day sections at Game 40 d5 with posted round times with time for a lunch break… Given where it is located, it gives the parents and coaches time to run out to fast food places or a grocery to feed the kids. We have kids everywhere playing chess.
Your parents are a bit different from the ones in this area. The vast majority of parents want an ASAP schedule for local one-day scholastics (there may be some selection bias there but even most inexperienced first-time parents have also said they liked the ASAP schedule and having experienced it they would not have wanted a fixed schedule).
Here we’ve also had requests (albeit denied) to run the scholastic state championships on an ASAP schedule (from a philosophical standpoint state championships deserve to have a more official feel, and from a practical standpoint state championships are much more likely to have sections large enough to have at least one game run the full time anyway and thus negate a lot of the potential gains of an ASAP schedule).
Some tournaments do insert a lunch break into an ASAP schedule (by listing a starting round time once the round it paired). The occasional tournament organizer has asked the TDs to slow down so that there is enough time to sell the food brought in for the participants/adults.
One of the hidden downsides to an ASAP schedule is that I’ve occasionally been so busy (keeping a multi-section ASAP tournament going quickly) that by the time I get a lunch break there is no real food left.
If your players are good enough and you don’t mind the risk of wasting paper and ink then you may be able to figure out the overwhelmingly likely result of the final game(s) and have the next round’s pairings printed and ready to post so they can go up the moment the last game finishes.
Out of force of habit, I usually have the next round’s pairings ready to post before the last games are done to ensure having the rounds start on time. It was common practice in the pairing card era. A quick scan of the boards tells me who is likely to win. If you want them to end a tedious endgame, it usually works to roll your eyes, sigh, and walk away from the game. The game ends sooner with the expected draw. Of course, this techniques is to be used only on adult players.
This adult player would be very upset st a TD interfering with a game in this way, even if my opponent was the one prolonging the game. I don’t like heavy handed directors. Of course, if we are using a site with a hard end time and the last round “should” have started by now I’d cut the TD a little slack.
If it’s close to the scheduled start of the next round, and if one player is obviously playing for a win while the other is obviously playing for a draw – K + RP + B of wrong color vs lone K, with the defending K already in the corner, would be a prime example – I’d be sorely tempted to pause the game and say “it’s time to make the pairings. I’m not going to adjourn this game, so please continue. If there is an agreed result within the next 5 minutes, I’ll pair both of you according to the agreed result. Otherwise, I will pair you” (looking at one of the players) “as a win, and you” (looking at the other player) “as a draw.”
I’d be tempted to add, “If you win” (looking at the first player) “I’ll give you a 15-minute break before you start your next game, and your opponent gets no break. If the game is drawn” (looking at the second player) “I’ll give you a 15-minute break, and your opponent gets no break.”
My scholastic events are G/30, current ratings used, with NO DELAY. That is what makes the most sense to parents who bring their kids to tournaments. And why
for local monthly, or weekly events one would use OLD, STALE, monthy published ratings is indeed mysterious, other than an ideal to do things the same way because they always have done them that way. With on-line teaching aides, and in many areas, more frequent tournament opportunities, a kids rating can boom
upward of hundreds of point in a single month, before the next montly publication. To allow kids who should be ineligible for lower U sections, as a result of their
previous weeks performance, really does not do them, or their opponents service.
It was a change going from bi-monthly to monthly supplements. It was a big changed going from mailed-in to on-line submission. It was a huge change to have rating information available anywhere but in the supplements or on the chess life mailing label.
When people say something has “always been done that way” I almost choke thinking about how things used to have to be done.
Tom Doan already mentioned being able to increase ratings. You already know that (with the appropriate pre-event publicity and announcements about live ratings) you can use live ratings.
28E. Assigned ratings for rated players. The director may assign a rating to any rated player. … 28E1. Rating level. The assigned rating shall not be lower than the layer’s last published USCF rating … 28E2. Cause for assignment. A rating may be assigned only for reasonable cause …
So it would appear that a director is allowed, even without advance notice in pre-event publicity, to use a “live” rating as long as it is higher than that player’s published rating. The “reasonable cause” is that the player has demonstrated that his current playing strength likely exceeds the strength indicated by his published rating.
Using live ratings sounds like a good idea for scholastic events, or events where little or no prize money is involved.
But organizers of large open events with big-money class prizes and early advance-entry deadlines need to be careful (and most are). A statement in the TLA like “The April 2018 published ratings will be the latest used for this event” would be highly advisable.
The USATE may be the best known event for which a fixed ratings list is absolutely necessary.
The primary disadvantage of using current ratings is that they can change without notice, and there may be no record of the ‘current’ rating that is being used. Personally, I like being able to point to a ratings list to say “That’s why Johnny is playing with rating XXXX instead of rating YYYY”, but it really depends upon the specifics of the event and the players, as well as on the TD/organizer’s tolerance for dealing with upset players and parents. If I was using current ratings for an event, I might avail myself of the custom ratings list options to have a unchanging record of the ratings being used to refer to.
I do wonder if TDs using current ratings bother with compliance with rule 28E1.
Any event that depends on players who have to plan on an overnight stay might experience problems with players who are moved to a different section because of a recent ratings change. This creates issues even when the ratings that are to be used are available well in advance.
