IIRC, Mr. Acers finished third at the World Senior Championship held last fall in Italy.
quote
of the players in the tournament are either fictitious or rated more than 150 points below the TD himself.
There is a phrase that some things should go without saying. Also in regard to the 150 points,
in some very small tournaments, the TD may be needed as a player. Let us not limit
ourselves due to the unethical and ridiculous actions of a few. There are those who seek
matches primarily to restore their ratings to a certain level. The problem is, very soon most
folks in a given area know about this, and the respect for that person decreases. What is
the real value in a titile earned by illicit means, or the respect gained from it. This activity
generally does not go unnoticed. Perhaps the ridicule given will be the just reward.
Rob Jones
Jude played in both the 2008 and 2009 World Senior Championships, and his performance in those events took his USCF rating under 2400.
In 2009 there were 183 players who had at least 40 regular rated games and had 15% or more of their games against another player. (In several cases, some of these players had most of their games against just 3 or 4 other players.)
I’m guessing these are probably weeknight club type tournaments?
Other possibilities:
Scholastic events (such as at a school or a chess teaching program)
Prison chess program
Isolated pool of players (by geography or by choice)
No new rule is needed. Just look over the record carefully enough, and listen to the witnesses at the events and the current rules would take care of the matter.
Finishing third indicates to me that his strength is not too shabby; certainly not like the miscreant being discussed on this thread.
Thank you for that information. That was more than I expected. It does make sense though with all of the weeknight activity across the country.
I meant a one time re-rate that would occur when the 25th game is rated. I will contact the Ratings Committee when I get the opportunity.
The disturbing thing about this TD’s events is that nobody completes the schedule. It seems like the other players don’t play each other, so the only ones playing all the rounds are him and I presume his son or brother. It seems like “tournaments” that have so many byes and only one or two players playing and winning their games should raise some sort of flag.
I know sometimes clubs run a ladder or other loosely structured tournament where players may not play every week. We had such events in Burlington, Vermont back in the 70s. Players only got paired the weeks they showed up. We would do five rounds, and then send it in. Start over the next week. Some players might play all 5 weeks, other players 1 or 2 weeks. It would be obvious looking at the results that it was a legitimate event that was simply giving players the opportunity to play a rated game of chess every week.
In jwiewel’s situation I don’t think it’s a problem because it’s apparent that his events are normally run, and he may happen to be the highest rated player. I play in my club tournaments most of the time, though I’m never in a section with players rated 200-500 points lower then me. Hopefully the behavior of a few bad TDs won’t necessitate a prohibition on playing directors. Many clubs keep going because there is someone who is willing to direct and play. Playing while directing tends to hurt the director more then the players.
Well… not exactly. The club meets from 7pm to 11pm on Friday nights only. Other than this, there are no other regularly scheduled meetings in the Springfield Mo area. The senior center, which is where the club meets, is not available during the rest of the week for the chess players to use. The games are generally G/90 because of the 4 hour window provided for meeting time. So, who knows where these “tournaments” are being played…could be anywhere I suppose.
Especially after the comment that the other players are not playing each other, I think that the following is the best way to deal with the situation. I have not looked at the reports and am taking the posts at their word.
Report the suspicious games to Walter Brown at the USCF office. If I were there, I would look at the situation as follows.
- I would rule that the suspicious reports will be rated under match regulations for the following reasons.
A. They do not appear to be legitimate Swiss System or round robin tournaments as the majority of players are not completing the schedule and the normal pairing process does not appear to be followed.
B. Also because of the large number of games in a short period which is also not normal.
I would consider the following actions.
Assign a rating cap. The cap would remain in effect until the rating was confirmed through participation in at least 2 Swiss System events of at least 5 rounds each run by another TD. Alternatively, participation in a State or National championship of at least 6 rounds.
Due to the large number of games in such a short period, I might also write several of the involved players and ask for information about the games and club in order to verify that the games are actually being played.
Regards, Ernie
Perhaps the assistant TD listed on the tournament reports should be contacted as well to provide an explanation and verification. He should be in a little hot water with his TD certification, too, if this is a scam.
I have played in a few of the events at the Springfield club and while I can’t speak to games that take place before or after times I was there I don’t think the Assistant TDs do anything in relation to the events, for the most part (though I could be wrong).
When the win streak was pointed out to me I too thought it was pretty fishy and does seem like the system is being gamed. I haven’t been terribly impressed with the quality of the events held there. I don’t plan on attending another event there unless it is being ran by a different TD.
Does the Chair have the final word on issues like this?
Since Ernie is apparently too modest to mention it, I note that he was once USCF Technical Director, a position since abolished (Walter Brown is the closest thing we have to that now). So he has plenty of experience on which to base his recommended handling of such a situation.
When we had a Technical Director, it was well established that he had authority to act in obvious cases of misconduct, without the need to consult any of the USCF committees (though he might inform them as a courtesy). Given that precedent, I don’t think anyone would have grounds to object if “the office” just decided to implement something along the lines of Ernie’s suggestion.
– Hal Terrie
I believe that in such cases the Technical Director made a recommendation to the Executive Director who made the final decision on any action (and signed any letters.) Walter Brown has made recommendations regarding ratings to the ED in a few circumstances, as has, I believe, Chuck Lovingood, Walter’s assistant.
Although the match rules as updated by the Board a few years ago (see main.uschess.org/docs/gov/report … atches.php) explicitly authorize the USCF office (meaning the ED) to treat situations involving large numbers of games between two players as matches, there have been no cases yet where this has been ordered, and it would probably take a little programming to implement that. Similarly, we have no programming for ratings ceilings at this time. However, both of those modifications are certainly possible.
The match rules limit players to no more than a 50 point gain or loss due to a single match and no more than a 200 point cumulative gain or loss through match play over three years.
An even more interesting question is, would the original TD (the allegedly unethical guy) submit all the games for rating if he happened to lose one of them? The laws of probability say such a loss will happen sooner or later.
This brings up another question: Has this TD ever failed to submit the results of a supposedly rated game? Given the probabilities, a 75-game winning streak is extremely unlikely, even against much lower-rated opponents.
This, in turn, raises the question, why is everybody assuming these 75 games were all actually played to begin with?
Bill Smythe
I worked in the USCF office in the summer of 1972, helping them catch up on ratings, which at the time were kept on 3 x 5 index cards. There was a huge tray of these cards just inside the office door.
On Jude’s card there was a note: “Do not allow this player’s rating to go over 2399 without explicit permission from Ed Edmondson.”
Bill Smythe
The question I have is–How objective are the ratings?