So, does the program TDs use to submit results online through the TD/Affiliate Support Area recognize increment time controls? If so, how should that be reported?
I submitted a tournament online Monday night. It was a 40/90 Swiss, with one fill-in game played at G/60, Inc-30. I created a new section for the fill-in game, selected Regular rating system and put G/60, INC-30 as the time control.
The validation report spat back an error message: “This looks like a Quick Chess event,” or something like that. The system would not accept the event for rating until I changed the listed time control for the fill-in game. Since it was only Regular-rated anyway, I changed it to 40/90—same as the main event—and the report went through.
Should I have written Inc rather than INC? (If the system is that picky I will not be the only TD scratching my head…) Also, I thought a tournament was rated under whatever system applied to the slowest game in the event—i.e. if there are two sections, one at 40/90 and another at G/60, then all games from both sections are only Regular-rated, even though the G/60 section games would normally qualify as Dual. This since the software can’t rate different sections of a single event under different rating systems…or so I read on the Forum, I think.
Point is that even if the INC-30 did not ‘take’ in the time control field, why would the system think it was a Quick Chess event? Anyone else have a similar experience?
This could become an issue as G/60, Inc-30 catches on as a popular time control. I know a chess academy in NJ that holds lots of G/60, Inc-30 games. As far as I can see, all those games are now and have been Dual-rated all along. I wonder if that’s because the folks in charge there tried to submit them as Regular-only online but got error messages, or if they did not get the memo that any increment or delay longer than 15 seconds is deemed too slow for Quick or Dual rating.
This lends strength to the argument to abolish the Dual system, but that likely deserves a separate thread in the Issues Forum.
Here’s what was posted in the news area of the TD/A home page several months ago:
Until 1/1/2012 we are still operating under the rules adopted two years ago, so any time that is subtracted from the clocks to compensate for delay or increment time is ignored in deciding whether an event is quick rated only, dual rated or regular rated only. For example, an event advertised as G/30 but with clock settings of G/25+5sec delay is considered Game/30.
The rules adopted in 2008 do not differentiate between delay and increment mode. As long as the delay or increment is 15 seconds or less, the exact amount of delay or increment is not important. But if either increment or delay is 16 seconds or more, then the event is regular rated only, regardless of how much time there is on the clock. (However, there must always be at least five minutes on the clock in order for the event to be USCF ratable, something that was confirmed by the Delegates last month.)
Maybe this important information could be “sticky-ed” to a more prominent spot when TDs log onto TD/A to submit reports? Right now it’s several items down in the news items at the bottom of the screen.
Now that I think of it, I recall another TD who complained the system would not take “G/xx” as a time control. It took a long time before he figured out that “Game/xx” worked. To many TDs “G/xx” would seem more intuitive—and returning to the main TD/A page to scroll through news items might not be the first thing they think of.
Thanks again for the hard work to keep this thing going.
It must have been something else, because I see many events rated in the past few weeks with a time control of G/xx. This is what’s actually in the field, Game/30 and G/30 are of course the same thing.
We submitted one just this past weekend with “G/30” as the control, and not only was it accepted, it passed the verification first time through with no errors or warning notes – a new experience for me.
I got the answer to my question: “I know a chess academy in NJ that holds lots of G/60, Inc-30 games. As far as I can see, all those games are now and have been Dual-rated all along. I wonder if that’s because the folks in charge there tried to submit them as Regular-only online but got error messages, or if they did not get the memo that any increment or delay longer than 15 seconds is deemed too slow for Quick or Dual rating.”
The Senior TD who directs many of these events—a likely future NTD, for whom I have great respect—informed me he did not know of the revised policy that increment/delay of more than 15 seconds makes an event Regular-ratable only. He had been submitting the results as Dual—in good faith.
This will happen a lot as increment gains traction, especially G/60, Inc-30. It will be impossible to catch unless a player in an increment event (Inc-16+) complains when he sees it was Dual-rated.
The good thing is that most players care so little about their Quick ratings they won’t notice. That also supports the notion that it is time to abolish Dual ratings. There will be enough confusion over controls such as G/15, Inc-15 without adding a built-in chaos factor of some G/60, Inc-30 games being reported as Regular-only and other such games as Dual…by competent, experienced TDs who missed this particular nuance.
Either abolish the Dual system or launch an informational campaign to educate TDs and players
about which time controls fit into which system. As things stand, I sympathize with those who scratch their heads. Some folks have better ways to advance the cause of chess than wade through the Rules updates pdf doc on the USCF site.
If I cared enough to spend the time, I could dig up many events that should have been Dual rated but were only rated as Regular; now the opposite is true, and getting truer by the day. In the former case we see TDs and players who are ‘deliberately dense’ at times; in the latter case we see smart, well-meaning people who never got the memo on the new rule, or scratch their head when they do.
Advancing the cause includes staying current on the rules. For TDs that should be a standard responsibility.
From the top of page two of the current (effective January 2010) online rules update:
Pretty straightforward, no wading required. Additionally, the TD/Affiliate area FAQs have more information under What time control do I report?, and Allowable Time Controls (older, probably not completely up to date) is more descriptive.
Part of the reason for changing the validation code a few months back was so that TDs did not have to enter an event with a time control of G/60 + 30 seconds increment as G/61 in order to get it to be regular-only.
Here are the results of two tests I just ran:
This one failed validation as a dual rated event:
This one passed validation as a regular-only rated event:
We did publicize this change in the validation code in the TD/A news section, it was even bannered at the top of the TD/A login page for several weeks. I believe I also posted about it here, and I think I may have sent it to Jennifer for CLO, too.
Perhaps we should send out an email blast to all TDs and affiliates about this? (We did not have that capability until fairly recently.)
I have already suggested that we send out a blast to all TDs and affiliates about the rules and dues changes made in August, we could include this information as well. I will bring this up again with the rules committee and ED/Board.
As far as getting rid of the dual rated option, or even cutting back on the borders between quick/dual and dual/regular, that privilege belongs to the Delegates, and I did not perceive much sentiment for doing that in August. Maybe YOU don’t like dual rated events, but most people seem to either not care about it or prefer it.
I think an email blast would be a great idea. It will take some time for everyone to get the memo.
I deleted a long post I started about the absurdity of some events being Dual-rated and others of exactly the same time control being only Regular-rated. That’s happened in one direction ever since Dual-ratings took effect; it will now happen in the other direction, as well, especially as G/60, Inc-30 catches on.
The point is that in many cases the past few years where G/30-G/60 events were rated only as Regular, the TD did so deliberately, possibly with the unspoken or spoken consent of the few players who cared either way. There is one example of this not far from here, as Steve Immitt and I have pointed out several times.
Now we will see TDs and players excited about the new increment controls, such as G/60, Inc-30…and most of them won’t have a clue that the “Inc-30” part of it renders the control too slow for Dual rating. Yes, TDs should check the Rules update doc now and then…but not all of them do, and they would have no reason to pro-actively seek out info on the already murky-to-most reasoning behind the Dual/Regular cut-off point.
Also, if the ED can simply change the time threshold for Quick Chess rating by decree, as happened a few years ago, why could not the elected EB abolish the Dual rating system? The Delegates could always “un-abolish” it in less than a year—it would be interesting to see that vote, actually.
If most players cared about their Quick ratings this would be a Big Deal. That fact that they don’t and it’s not tells us something.
I know of at least one instance when the time control was GAME/60 Increment 30 and the TD deliberately left the increment off so that it would pass validation as a dual rated event. The TD did that because USCF wants as many events as possible to be dual rated.
It seems to me that the Rules Committee and Delegates stated rather clearly two years ago which events are to be dual rated and which are not to be dual rated. If the increment or delay is 16 or more seconds, it is NOT DUAL RATABLE.
TDs do not and SHOULD NOT have any discretion in the matter. They should accurately report the time control that was being used.
If organizers don’t like dual rating, then they shouldn’t run events that are dual ratable according to the rules. If they do like dual rating, then they should run events that are dual ratable according the rules.
As far as I know, there are no similar circumstances regarding Game/30 or Game/60 events to raise the issue of exigent circumstances.
For those who weren’t around when this was debated by the Delegates some 20 years ago, the 10 minute minimum was chosen so as not to conflict with WBCA games at Game/5.
Thanks. Specifically, the Allowable Time Controls document states that G/3, delay-2 will be considered as G/5 and that in Regular-rated games each player must have at least 30 minutes of main time on his clock. (Before the deduction, if any, to compensate for delay/increment)
The hard copy version of that doc still gets sent to affiliates and possibly newly certified TDs, as of last time I checked. Not all of them use TD/A, let alone check for old news items at the bottom of the page.
I agree that TDs should make an effort to keep up with current rules. In this case, we could perhaps make it easier for them to so do, especially since the new time control/increment rules are not intuitive and have not yet been well-publicized.
Apart from the debatable contention that Bill Goichberg/CCA equals USCF, where is the evidence that USCF wants as many events as possible to be Dual-rated?
That’s why I called out that the “Allowable Time Controls” is old and possibly outdated in many spots. Per final sentence of page 3 of the current RuleBookChanges document, 5Fa time deductions do not apply to G/5-G/9.
Mike Nolan may know who authored it. It would take some coordination to stop including it in the new TD packets and the website until it’s updated.
I don’t know if I’d call a new rule intuitive , but at any given time there are number of rules that need clarification for a small-time director like me. For those of us who can’t attend the Open workshops I think the best we can do is watch/wait for the updates and distribute those out to our local contacts.
I don’t know who last worked on the allowable time controls document, but I will advise the publications department that it needs to be updated.
As far as I know, we do not send newly certified TDs a copy of that document, I don’t know if affiliates still get a copy or not.
Followup: According to the USCF office they do not send a copy of the allowable time controls document to affiliates.
BTW, the reason for going to dual rating in 2000 was indeed to increase the number of quick-rated games. Whether anyone cares about their quick rating more today than they did in 1999 is a separate issue.
, but at any given time there are number of rules that need clarification for a small-time director like me. For those of us who can’t attend the Open workshops I think the best we can do is watch/wait for the updates and distribute those out to our local contacts.