Has PlyCount electronic scoresheet been approved by the USCF? They are advertising it as an approved device and I do not remember seeing being approved.
On their home page, they say it is USCF certified. The word “certified” is a link to the following page:
plycount.com/public/doc/USCF … ounter.pdf
In that there is the USCF letterhead and a statement by the “Electronic Scoresheet Certification Team” of the United States Chess Federation saying that it is indeed USCF certified. It also states that as of July, 2013 it was not FIDE certified.
The linked letter says in the first paragraph “Plycounter . . . has been granted certification.”
In the next to last paragraph, it says, in direct contradiction, “The official certification is currently in progress.”
The letter bears no signature, and nebulously refers to the “Electronic Scoresheet Certification team.”
If this letter is authentic, then whoever generated it should be retrained to generate communications that are traceable to a person and don’t contradict themselves on the main point to be communicated. That person should then be tested for these competencies by redrafting and sending an appropriate letter to Plycounter.
Until that happens, if someone comes to one of my events with a Plycounter, they may expect me to disallow its use.
EDIT: Initial indications are the letter is authentic. Neither Plycount nor members are well served by the production of certification letters that are difficult to distinguish from third-rate forgeries.
As a member of the rules committee (and as a delegate), I am curious who constitutes the “Electronic Scoresheet Certification team”.
Regarding the part I highlighted in red - you’re taking it out of context. In the letter, they say they are quoting information from the Plycount website, and then quote what the website said at the time the letter was written. The part in red above is part of what was quoted.
Nothing in the letter appears to be contradictory, it simply appears to have been misread.
I’m aware that’s a cut and paste from the web site. It’s a cut and paste that describes the device in a manner directly contrdictory to the rest of the letter. The sentence isn’t necessary to include. Its inclusion is self defeating, even in context.
Even discounting this, the strange structure and lack of signature led my wife, who has some responsibility for analyzing documents in her professional life and no experience in chess, to poclaim, when invited to read what causing her husband’s jaw to drop, “This is b------t.”
In both substance and form, the letter is defective and embarrassing. Whoever produced it needs to be instructed to do better and how to do better.
There is a small team that evaluates these devices and their identity is concealed so that they are never influenced by others or by companies seeking certification. The people are quite competent.
Mike
It’s not contradictory. The information was clearly put on the website prior to the writing of the letter. They represent two different points in time.
Yes, the letter could be better; but your picking a nit that really isn’t.
Can anyone tell me where the USCF keeps and displays its list of approved electronic scorekeeping devices?
All I could find is this… archive.uschess.org/ratings/elec … esheet.pdf
Try here:
http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/reports/eScoresheets/CertificationGuidelines.pdf
(See the bottom of the document for the list.)
Though is it current? And why is it buried in that particular directory structure? Dunno, but I found it under “Home → New to Chess → Official Rules,” linked as e-scoresheet guidelines, after trying to make Google my friend.
Nice find - I searched and didn’t find that.
I agree - wrong directory structure, and its not quite up to date based on the Plycount release.
Perhaps someone should contact the office and find out why PlyCount is not there–or even if it should be.
Just curious: How should someone (a TD) react when a player shows up with a new device that he claims has been certified by the USCF? Suppose the TD has never seen the device before and has no idea how it should look and work. How would the TD allow one device and disallow another similar-looking device? And how would the TD respond to a claim by an opponent alleging cheating?
I know some experienced organizers / directors have explicitly advertised restrictions on the use of some or all electronic score sheets for exactly the concerns that I have.
Michael Aigner
That’s a family-sized pack you’re opening. 
If I’m not mistaken, we’ve discussed some of those items before on the forums. I’ll answer one at a time, my somewhat-humble opinions only:
A lot to me hinges on whether or not the USCF website lists the device, on that selfsame list above that I quoted. If a new device has been added to the approved list, I would think that it merits immediate updating here and in Chess Life. (Online before this week is out, and next available issue that has not been set in stone.) Contrariwise, if that USCF letter is bogus I think it should be debunked here, like yesterday.
(Additionally, for my own device: I have before carried a copy of that document with me so that I’m actually carrying the proof and invite a questioning TD to verify the printout’s validity. But, in fact, I’ve ended up converting a couple of other TDs and players into using what I’m using - unintentionally, but still. If there’s an active TD in Central Illinois that hasn’t seen me and my eNotate show up (except Keith Ammann - still haven’t managed to get up Freeport way darn it! and yes I know that ain’t Central IL but still)… then I have to find out when their next rated event is and put it in my calendar. Must remember that if I play outside my local area that I may still need to carry the proof with me. I also used to [and sometimes still] explain what I’m using to my opponent before we start.)
One allows and disallows devices, at minimum, based on that standard. I am very much in the camp that if the organizer is not supplying official scoresheets whose use is mandated for all players that any approved e-scoresheet must be allowed (pre-publicized announcements disallowing them notwithstanding.) Revised Rule 43, page 19, “Electronic scoresheets are subject to certification guidelines as published by the USCF. An electronic scoresheet not so certified is not considered standard and may only be used at the discretion of the tournament director,” and its surrounding text, implies to me that a certified electronic scoresheet is therefore considered standard and the director does not have discretion to disallow it.
Edited: If someone showed up on Saturday with a device I’ve never heard of before, I’d inform them I hadn’t heard about this device being certified and ask them if they’re carrying any kind of proof that it has been USCF certified. If they presented that letter… I might give them the benefit of the doubt and watch their use of it very carefully. And then I’d be very unhappy with USCF for not sending out timely notice about it, if it turns out this is legitimate.
And I am also of the opinion that anybody wanting to be a certified TD should keep current with that list and what approved devices look like when running. Conversely, I think USCF owes it to us TDs to keep us apprised of new approvals simultaneously with their occurring. It would be nice if an ‘official’ guide were built and maintained here… but who bells that cat?
Anyway, last item for cheating… Someone asks me if that player with their PDA or Monroi is cheating, I confirm with them that they know about the e-scoresheet rules / attempt to discern if the complainant has additional evidence beyond just using the device. If someone is using an e-device, I will have already noticed it and observed them - one of the first things I do when touring the floor after start of a new round. With this new one, I’ll certainly be looking over the shoulder of anyone using it. Again, I personally consider this part of my responsibility as a TD to ensure the playing conditions are fair - dunno what others do.
Will I give this benefit of the doubt? Maybe.
BTW, Plycount also seems to have an official YouTube video of how the device is used: youtube.com/watch?v=RSzTuSimTGE
I would plan on having the certification letter with me. Understandably, that might still be insufficient. Seems like there should be a TD/affiliate email list that could go out for important updates… is there and maybe I missed it?
As a chess coach I attended the 2013 Southwest Open and one-day scholastic in Dallas, over last weekend. Paco Gomez was there demonstrating his Plycount
electronic scoresheet. I believe he is planning to attend several other local DFW clubs and tournaments in the near future supporting his product. I look forward
to these presentations, and his attendance. While I am learning about the specific differences between this device and Monroi, I do know that there is a very
significant difference in price between the two, with the Plycount starting off around $169.00 and the Monroi around $ 400. Also E-notate devices are still
available off Ebay and other internet sellers.
Which is better?? I think the answer to this will ultimately come down to the goals, ability levels and desires of the individual purchaser.
As I learn more, I will be glad to post.
Rob Jones
I did ask on the YouTube channel if it was officially approved by USCF and the reply was that yes the USCF has approved it but FIDE has not yet.
So, the question is does one of us have to contact the office and inquire why it’s not yet on the approved devices list? Or is there a friendly employee soul or EB member monitoring who will call the office’s attention to this thread?
Yep, done.
Thanking you.
The link for the scoresheets changed from my earlier post to something that makes more sense, though. Now it is:
http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/reports/eScoresheets/CertificationGuidelines.pdf
It is still linked at the New to Chess → Official Rules section, though now behind a “more” prompt.
This is the first I’ve heard of an Electronic Scoresheet Certification Team.