Is There A Time Limit To Submit Tournament Results?

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Hi,

I’ve tried scouring the rulebook (7th edition) and searching online, and not finding anything that directly answers this:

Is there a time limit (days, weeks, months, etc.) that a TD has to submit OTB tournament results? If so, what is it? I seem to recall a question on my exam about Correspondence (I think it was) Chess - but I can’t find any references to regular OTB tournaments. Can you please reference a page / section / subsection for this? Of course, I’m sure “ASAP” is always the guidance, but is there a “drop dead” time limit? I suppose if there isn’t anything addressing this, then it’s safe to conclude there is no ‘expiration date’ then theoretically, someone could wait months or longer to submit results (while waiting on an errant member to pay / join USCF, etc.). The last relevant thread I saw on this in this forum went back to 2005 or so and were a bit murky then, so perhaps things have changed & clarified a bit?

Thanks for your assistance!

1 Like
2

The tournament report form, which links to https://new.uschess.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/tournament-report-form.pdf but which is a dead link now with a live predecessor form at https://www.uschess.org/docs/forms/Tournament%20Report%20Form.pdf, lists seven days.

There is no enforcement mechanism I am aware of other than noting it to USCF.

2 Likes
3

As already pointed out, the old paper US Chess Tournament Report Form stated “Reports should be submitted no later than seven (7) days after the ending date of the tournament.” I’m not sure how many events are still submitted by mail, but personally I think it’s time to move to an online only submission and also codify that 7 day limit for over-the-board events.

Note that Chapter 10, Online Chess, has the following rule: “A director has up to three weeks to submit the rating reports for an online event.”

The TD Tip that accompanies this says “The rules for online play deliberately allow directors more time to submit rating reports compared to over-the-board play for at least two reasons. First, generating the rating report may be more complex, depending on the service provider. Second, the Chief TD needs time to review the output produced by the fair play process for the event, including any claims of fair play violations made by players. In general, the rating reports for small events can be turned in almost as quickly as comparably sized over-the-board events. Larger tournaments, or events with substantial prizes and/or suspected fair play issues, may take more time.”

I will also mention that FIDE has specific deadlines for rating report submissions, and to meet those US Chess has the following policy for FIDE rated events held in the USA (Information on FIDE Rated Tournaments in the USA | US Chess.org): “All FIDE rated tournaments that end at least 6 days prior to the end of the month must be submitted to US Chess and FIDE for rating in that month, no later than 3 days prior to the end of the month. All other FIDE rated tournaments must be submitted to US Chess and FIDE for rating no later than 7 days after the end of the tournament. For FIDE rated tournaments lasting more than 30 days, an interim report (the most up to date pairings/results file) must be submitted to fide@uschess.org no later than 4 days prior to the end of each month so that all games played so far may be submitted to FIDE for rating in that month. Such events will not need to be submitted to US Chess for rating on an interim basis.”

1 Like
4

If the event is very tardy (6 months, I think), it will need an override from the office to pass validation. The request for that override should have a good explanation for why it is so tardy.

1 Like
5

Thanks for this. So it appears there’s not any hard & fast “rule” per se, but for OTB the principle guidance seems to be submit results ASAP, preferably within a week. I’m kind of surprised there’s really not a “chapter & verse” on this at this point in time, but perhaps there’s a reason for the latitude here.

Again I appreciate the response.

6

Thanks. Hopefully the principles can be memorialized in an upcoming rulebook soonish. However, I can appreciate the difficulty of wording a “rule” - and one that is influenced by changed in technology of recent years - fewer snail mailed results and more results submitted via Internet capable apps (WinTD, SwissSys, Caisa, etc ) - but realistically not EVERYONE has access to those. Ideas vary, and here we are.

Thanks for your insightful response!

7

There’s a lot in your response, and I really appreciate the research and labor you put into it. You supplied some specific chapter & verse (such as there is) which is very helpful for what I’m looking for. So I’ve come to the conclusion that there is a principle here that TD 's should make best effort to submit results promptly, but there is no “drop dead” deadline (other than possibly, as Nolan suggests, 6 months).

Thank you for a well researched and cogent reply to my query. I do appreciate it very much!

8

The wiggle room 7-day submission US Chess policy is not a rule. Some policies are hard and fast. Some policies are not. Some policies change quickly. So, do wiggle room policies–not controlled by the Delegates–belong in the rulebook or online?

BTW when a non-member is holding up submission of an event there is a small $$$ fee that the TD can pay to get the event rated–policy again.

As previously pointed out: Non-members need to become members to play rated US Chess. TDs that allow non-members to play are just asking for preventable headaches.

9

Hi Tim,

Disclaimer: I am not the TD in question, but it happened at my local club (we have more than 1 TD). So I started researching it and didn’t see a clear “answer” (because there can’t be one at this time). My personal principle is “No non-members unless I have a check, card or cash and a completed membership form!”. Never “I’ll pay you next week!”. I hate to be cynical, but being nice to 1 player can easily get you badgered by 49 others….

Thanks for your response here. Yup, absolutely. There are differences between “laws” and “principles”. For a law, a package might be marked “Do not drop!”. But the delivery courier can still “legally” kick it to your porch without dropping it. But a principle might be if the package is stamped “Fragile, handle with care”. There’s a difference, and there’s opportunity to violate either one (because people…).

I think the evolving world of tech/communication is in the mix here as well… most but not all TD’s have access to a computer (enter WinTD, SwissSys, Caisa, etc.). Paper forms getting lost in the snail mail (or just taking 4 days to be delivered, etc.) is likely going the way of the dodo due to the prevalence of the internet and computer - but you’re probably in a better position to know that than I. Still, the paper form is still accessible to those that need/want it (but I don’t know for how much longer!).

Personally, I believe the onus on the TD to make best effort to submit the ratings report in a timely manner. But it’s also on the TD to be aware of current polices - wiggle room or not - and when to wiggle and to decide when it’s finally time to submit. But what I “think” doesn’t always matter, and I accept that. :wink:

Regarding the small fee to re-rate: I will suggest that option to the TD that is having the issue! Great suggestion!

Yes, I emphatically agree - letting a non-member compete is borrowing trouble. Regrettably, I wasn’t at the tournament where the problem arose. The TD in question is very new. Gotta start somewhere, and now, I’m sure, a lesson learned. I was coached years ago to not let non-members play and then to try to collect data and fees & enroll later. Guaranteed heartburn.

Thanks again for your insight and thoughts here, very much appreciated! :+1:

10

And there is an additional wiggle in that submitting a tournament can be done within seven days regardless of how many membership issues there are. Getting those issues resolved so that the tournament can actually be rated might take longer, but the submission to TD/A is, technically, done within the recommended time frame.

Back before the re-rate process was available the need for a short window was more critical to reduce any rating manipulation that could be done by timing the submissions.

With people wanting their new ratings calculated immediately (including right after they finish their final round game even though other games are still going on) anyone taking as long as seven days will be getting lambasted by players wanting it to be finished with.

1 Like
11

In regards to verifying memberships before allowing a player to play there are three issues that jump out at me immediately.

If a tournament allows on-site entry then there can be a noticeable slowdown in processing entries when you don’t know whether or not there is an existing ID number. The number of on site entries is less than it used to be, so this issue is nowhere near what it used to be.

Advance entries might be done by players that are valid members, but their memberships might expire prior to the actual start of the event. Such players may figure that they’ve already paid and will be paired for the first round, not arriving in time to get their membership processed before the pairings are posted.

I’ve had times when two different players have similar ratings, the same name, and the same city, with one being an expired member. With membership cards no longer being common, and with parents often looking up their kids’ membership IDs on line, it might not be until the second or third round or even post-tournament that the error was noticed. Another problem is when a player has a receipt for their membership dues, but they inadvertently created a new ID instead of renewing their existing one. Or parents that enter one child, then update their family membership and inadvertently end up entering a second child using the same ID number.

The perfect world would not have any of these issues causing problem. There is an old saying that “in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is a difference”.

Until we move to advance-only registration done on websites that verify tournament membership as of the tournament dates, and verify that the entry is using the correct ID for the actual player and that no other entry has been done for that player using a name prior to a name correct, there will be problems (a steadily declining number but still some).
Those problems need to be resolved before the tournament is rated but thinking that no tournament ever will have such problems is a bit unrealistic (I’ve directed in tournaments in cell phone/wifi dead spots - last one maybe six years ago).

12

That is my favorite part of using Chessnut.club because when people sign up, it notifies me if their membership is current or not, even showing which players membership will expire within a month, etc. Very handy!

My last event, I did have a member create a new membership ID, as he had not played in over 10 years. Once I was made aware of this, I edited his rating from unrated to 1577 ( his last rating, per the rules under section 28 for pairing purposes ) and immediately emailed membership @ uschess to merge the two. I still turned in the event the next day, so no slowdown of turning in rating reports, thankfully.

13

The $10 fee is SUPPOSED to be used for cases where the TD didn’t find out until after the event is over and players have left that some player wasn’t a current member. In other words, to correct mistakes and oversights, not for promises to pay dues on Tuesday (for a hamburger today.)

We do track usage of the $10 fee, and I’ve seen situations where a TD pays the $10 fee for the same player more than once within a few months. That’s neither a mistake nor an oversight, IMHO.

1 Like