Clearly, 9.2 would mean that you can’t advertise a section to be FIDE rated and then say, oops, we have a 2400+ player, ergo we can’t rate the section. To me, that actually would seem to mean that the language cited about ratability of “games” (rather than “sections”) is intentional—some of the games are out because one of the players has too high a rating for the time control but overall the section can still be (and must still be) submitted for rating.
Note that the game is out for both players, and it’s out for both players based upon the situation known before the tournament starts, and thus isn’t much different from all games in a fast schedule being out.
If a player enters a FIDE rated section with the expectation that all games would be FIDE rated (or at least all in the longer time control if a shorter schedule had the first games too fast) then the player does not get the number of FIDE-rated games that the player could have had if the game was not excised from the FIDE report. Those players that enter because they want FIDE-rated games would have cold comfort in a good result being only US Chess rated.
It used to be that the US Chess TDCC would handle such FIDE cases but, now that a different committee was created a few years back, they are handled by the US Chess FIDE events committee. uschess.org/index.php/Govern … laint.html
Trying to spin the interpretation of a US Chess rule may or may not work, but only the people pushing that spin would be at risk of having actions taken against them. Trying to spin the interpretation of a FIDE rule may or may not work (attempts from the US have often leaned towards “may not”) and those placed at risk include our federation, not just the few pushing the spin. As a member of the federation I would be quite perturbed by somebody else potentially placing the federation at risk over how FIDE “may or may not” rule. Now if there was explicit clarification that the desired spin really was valid then I’d be okay with that, but without that explicit clarification … no.
I wish you well. Since this will (apparently) be your first FIDE-rated tournament as a TD, my advice is, even if you achieve the above objectives by tournament time, you hire an additional NA to assist you.
The main point of me becoming a FIDE NA is because there aren’t any active FIDE arbiters in my area. We’ve never really looked into trying to hire one from another area.
Potential confusion. As I understand it you need an Arbiter certified by FIDE, not necessarily an FA. It can also be an IA or an NA.
There are events for which only some subset of certified Arbiters can be used, just like there are US Chess tournaments that need a TD at some certification level.
I didn’t say a FIDE Arbiter. I should have been more clear. Yes you must be an arbiter with a FIDE certification to run any FIDE tournament. And the level of certification required depends on the nature of the tournament, much like US Chess requirements. The difference is FIDE rules are much more absolute. You don’t meet the requirements and they don’t rate the tournament.