Just curious.
In holding an unrated scholastic tournament, with USCF members and non-members playing, can it be partially rated? I mean, where USCF members got paired together, could those games be submitted for rating, minus the other games in the tournament?
Dwight
No.
A TD doing so risks being sanctioned.
No, absolutely not. It’s “all or none.”
Okay, that was sort of my assumption, having never seen it mentioned before.
But given the strength of the no’s given…why? Just trying to understand. Don’t see it being worth the minimum rating fee for a handful of games, but how is it different from something like a one game match or some of the rated ‘side’ games I’ve seen listed in the MSA?
Dwight
Our small club ran a Quick event and we pre-announced that the games of current USCF members vs. other current USCF members would be rated, while those of non USCF members would not. We felt this encouraged players to renew or join. It was pre-announcement just to make sure, and was submitted for rating and rated.
The rulebook states that all games in a section are to be rated if any are to be rated. The first place I found it in a quick look is the section on the rating system. There are some exceptions to this (such as state fairs), but they generally require first notifying the USCF office and getting approval.
Without that approval, any interested party can raise an issue with the USCF that could potentially result in the TD(s) getting warned, put on probation, suspended, expelled or something else. This could happen even if there was a prior announcement of what would be done.
Two sections (one rated and one not) would be fine, but a single mixed section is not.
Okay, ‘in the rulebook’ works for me. That’s chapter 8? I’ve got to read that a little closer. I’m overlooking it. I’m new to the TD biz, so I’m still curious. Is there a reason why or just tradition?
Having a rating is a privilege of membership, and we are a membership organization.
Another reason is that we don’t want people setting up conditions under which some of their games in an event are to be rated and others aren’t, if you play in a rated event, all your games are rated.
Side game or extra game sections are often games that don’t fit into another section, such as cross-section pairings, playoffs or games where a player has a bye for prize and pairing purposes but is given an opponent (often a house player) against which to play a rated game.
Thanks for explaining. I’m new to TD side of the game and want to be clear on what I can suggest to the school I’m helping out. Looks like seperate, side by side, rated / un-rated tournaments are the way to go. It’s just going to make for some small sections for us, where I’d hoped to keep a larger group playing together. And I thought it might promote recognition of your first paragraph and encourage new memberships.
I can agree most with your second paragraph. Less confusion is always better. And God knows, I confuse myself too much as it is.
I guess I wasn’t understanding some of what I’ve seen in the extra game sections in the MSA. I thought some were not related to the main tournament. A couple of house players or organizers playing a game during slow periods.
Thanks again. It’s getting clearer after each step.
If this is at a school, you have some other options:
Any affiliate can hold a K-3 JTP event, where membership is not required. All players must be in grade 3 or below. (That includes house players, so no parents or coaches can fill in when there are an odd number of players.)
Moreover, if all the players are students at that school and the school has a scholastic affiliate, the scholastic affiliate can run a K-12 JTP event, where membership is not required. All players must be students at that school and in grades 12 or below. (Again, that includes house players.)
In either case, all players still have to have USCF IDs, of course.
I/we are also considering those. One question. For home schooled kids going into a K-3 JTP…okay if age-appropriate for grade 3 or below? And what age would that be?
(Warning! Bad home-school joke)
Public school parent: What grade are you in?
Home schooled kid: Uh, what subject?
Home schooled students tend to fall into the “this rule doesn’t quite fit” category a lot.
I think the ‘sanity check’ code limits K-3 events to people who are no older than 10, figuring that someone could possibly start kindergarten late at age 6 and be 9, possibly turning 10 by the end of the school year in 3rd grade.
In the old days, when they used to hold kids back a grade, it was not that unusual to see someone who turned 20 during the senior year in HS, if he or she made it that far. (I think there are still some athletes in a few states who get intentionally held back just before HS in the hopes of being that much bigger/stronger in college.)
Also see rule 23C.
If you are a TD set up in the TD/affiliate area, and an affiliate is also set up and allows you to enter memberships, then you can create the new non-member IDs (for JTP or for tournament memberships). Once those are set up you can do on-line submission of the tournament for rating (you’ll need to then edit the sections for JTP or approve the tournament memberships for other sections with non-members).
Mike Nolan has incorporated a number of sanity-check warnings on the IDs, but please double-check them. The sanity-checks are particularly useful when third-grader Edward Smith played, registered as Edward Smith, you pulled Edward Smith’s ID from the supplement, and then in the rating validation you find out that THAT Edward Smith is a recently joined 45-year old who happens to live in the same state as the third-grader (a good reason to do the validation at a mid-tournament point before later doing the final submission).
Yes, the validation checks are still no substitute for the TD’s own eyes and experience. He or she was THERE, we weren’t!
As we now have over 700,000 current and former members in our database, the number of possible (wrong) IDs with similar names, possibly even in the same state and with similar ratings, is increasing every day.
At times I’m tempted to lower the tolerance levels a bit in the validation program.
Recently we had someone from Iowa complain that he had showed up in a tournament in a nearby state. His age and rating were both in the right range, and there were a few other out-of-state players in the event, so it triggered a ‘Note’ rather than a ‘Warning’, which means the TD didn’t HAVE to do anything about it, and I suspect a number of TDs treat the ‘no errors and warnings’ message as a sign that the event is perfectly OK. In this case, that wasn’t so.
You screwed up. This practice is specifically forbidden. Advance publicity has nothing to do with it.
Please identify the specific rule.
Even if true, it seems to me that allowing this promotes chess and encourages players to renew or join.
See page 100 in your rulebook: “Rule 23C. USCF membership requirement.”
As stated earleir in the thread you could do a rated and a non-rated section, but 23C says you can’t rate some but not all in a section. Mike said it earlier - membership organization and with membership comes rating. Let your non-members play and pay for their tournament membership which you include in the entry fee if you want. I think the tournament membership was designed in part to encourage folks to try it out at low cost.
“23C. USCF membership requirement. For the inclusive dates of the tournament, each player must be a member in good standing of the USCF, unless USCF regulations waive this requirement.”
P. 260. “Rated games. All games played in USCF-rated events are rated, including games decided by time forfeit, games decided when a player fails to appear for resumption after an adjournment, and and games played by contestants who subsequently withdraw or are not allowed to continue.”
There are several reasons for this, but the most obvious is that a contrary policy would be subject to flagrant abuse. (Rate the games of your pet player when he does well, ignore them when he doesn’t.)