It may be true that “ignorance is no excuse,” but that does little to actually change anything, especially as it may relate to cases where the ignorance is unintentional.
Some number TDs will not look up any rule changes since the 5th edition (which, we hope, they have in their hands), not because they don’t want to bother, but because it simply never occurs to them.
For a host of reasons, rule changes are difficult to communicate to all TDs (not to mention players!) in a way that they’ll actually sink in. To some extent that may be a TD’s fault for not keeping up, but it’s a common problem all organizations have, keeping various constituencies up to date on changes. You simply never accomplish 100% saturation. When the audience starts getting sick of hearing the same message, you MIGHT be getting as close as you can ever come.
It might help if USCF would “push” information about rule changes out more actively, rather than relying on TDs to come looking for it. Perhaps that’s a periodic email or an annual hard copy letter. Seems to me like a relatively easy/inexpensive way USCF could help more TDs keep current.
This means that 5 minutes + 16 second increment is regular rated even though the game would have to go 94 moves to surpass 30 minutes for each side. 30 minutes is the current minimum for a game to be dual rated when there is no increment. For the game to be regular rated only >60 minutes is required when there is no increment. That comes out to a 207 move minimum under G/5 + 16i.
What’s wrong with this picture? Something needs fixing!
That’s my point. It’s a quick time control rated as a regular only.
Those who don’t like the faster controls would avoid this one. They would not be fooled by the “regular rated only”.
As currently set up, the rules about which increment time controls are regular rated need drastic revisions. Perhaps some formula which assumes an average length of 40 moves could be employed.
Here’s a proposal. Add the minutes of the time control and 40 times the seconds of increment. When these add up to more than 1 hour, make it regular rated only. When they add up to less than 30 minutes, make it quick rated only. Anything in between would be dual rated.
This seems better than the USCF rules about which ratings would be affected Mike Nolan quoted earlier.
Tradition would say you use 60x the seconds, as was the standard when reducing total time control by 5min for a d/5 game was acceptable.
What’s the advantage of this over the current thresholds? I can’t see that it’s worth it to further convolute things. TDs and players will “police” themselves on the lower end of the spectrum (G/5 inc/20) and vote with their money and their feet.
I only reported the time control rules that the Rules Committee came up with (and the Delegates approved in 2008), I didn’t design them.
I have pointed out in the past that G/5 + 16 seconds is a regular-only time control. Moreover, G/29 + 15 seconds would be quick-only and G/30 with no delay would be dual rated. (The boundary condition cases are always where the problems are.)
However, like others I would be surprised if an organizer tried to run an event at G/5 + 16 seconds, and even more surprised if many high rated players chose enter it.
The current rules have the advantage of being fairly easy to explain, any rule that requires doing math to determine if the event is regular, quick or dual rated might wind up confusing both players and TDs.
I only suggested 40 x increment as a starting point. If you wanted to use 60, that would be OK.
There is one significant difference between delay and increment which might justify using a number of moves less than 60. In delay the amount of time not counted is less than or equal to the delay. In increment the full amount is added regardless of how long the move took (short of flagging).
As for voting with their feet, if they see a quick time control disguised as a regular one, that will be a problem.
As the boundaries are now set, I see the problem as being much bigger than it needs to be.
Yes Mike, I knew you didn’t write those rules. That’s why I specifically noted that you were quoting them.
Have we gotten so weak in math skills that doing simple multiplication and addition are “confusing”? I sincerely hope not.
I think you mean a Regular-rated tournament disguised as a Quick time control.
It’s only a problem if the TD/organizer pays for a venue, guarantees prizes, and no one shows up.
No, but the math is an unnecessary extra step. A refinement such as, “All primary time controls G/5-G/14 are Quick rated only, regardless of delay or increment,” would be more effective than arbitrary math quizes.
Then again…the G/5-G/14 boundary is arbitrary too…and I’m sure the TDCC workshop and Delegates will be excited to debate it.
