I just played in an event on Sat. March 19. I was just wondering, with the new online TD tournament ratings system, how long will it take for the tournament to get rated?
-Josh
If the TD is sending the tournament online, without any membership problems – could have been March 19. With new memberships, could need to deposit the checks or money, just to pay the membership and rating fees. There is more backroom duties then just taking care of the rating fees after the event.
That’s a question you need to ask of the TD, not here.
I think quite a few TDs are going to get asked that question in the future, either during the event or possibly by players deciding whether to register for the event at all.
Incidentally, you can use the ‘Events Received’ list on the ratings page to see whether the TD submitted the event online. We’re working on updating that page so that it shows the status of all pending events, including those sent to the USCF office.
However, it is still the case that the USCF cannot rate an event until the TD sends it in, whether that’s using the new online methods or by mailing the report to the USCF.
TD’s are pretty much in control of when events submitted online get rated, unless they choose to pay for memberships or rating fees by mailing a check to the office, in which case the processing of the check will determine when the event gets rated.
I think, though, that events submitted online with payment by check will generally get rated a day or two ahead of ones submitted on diskette or on paper, if only because all the office has to do is process the payment, not the whole tournament.
It’ll take around 6 weeks.
Figure 3 weeks to be received.
Then 3-4 to be rated.
I submitted an event on-line yesterday. Looking at the MSA I can tell it has already been rated. I also took care of all membership issues on-line first.
Tim
Looking at events received in TN, they’re averaging under 3 1/2 days
between when the event is received and when it is rated.
So far this month, 33 events have been receved in the TN office and rated that same day.
Maybe.
Mine from March 12 has not yet been rated or recieved.
When and where did you send it? If you sent it to NY, they will send it
to TN.
Mike: I’ve seen where online submitted tournaments have been rated quicker. But what about those submitted by the mail?
Example, the Billy’s (2-19) tournament in North Carolina. The USCF received it a month ago. The TD, a veteran, knows no reason why is hasn’t been rated. And has received no word from the USCF about any problems. This seems a little long to me. Especially when later tournaments have been rated since.
Thoughts?
For events mailed to TN after March 3rd, I think the USCF is staying on top of things. (I’d be happy to check on the status of the other event someone mentioned, but I need some minor details like when and where it was held, and hopefully the name of the event and the TD.)
The NC tournament was received in NY on February 28th, though it wasn’t entered until the March 24th because of the backlog in NY. It was rated earlier today.
I think Nancy was trying to get the April Supplement finalized on Friday, so she was concentrating on that rather than releasing events that had recently passed validation. (For those who don’t know, the USCF’s director of publications, Glenn Petersen, had a heart attack last weekend and there has been a scrambling of assignments in NY to make sure a number of time-critical projects don’t get forgotten about. Even so, the mailing of the April supplement is going to be a bit late, I’m sure we’ll start hearing from TDs on that soon.)
It may take another week or two to get the backlog worked down to what I would consider a more reasonable level, but then the backlog wasn’t built in a day either.
At the moment there are around 130 events received by the USCF in the mail that have been entered but haven’t passed validation yet. 30 of those are holdover events from the old ratings system, several of them from the same organizer.
TDs have been requested to send rating reports to the TN office. (We e-mailed about 1700 TDs and affiliates with that information earlier this week.)
Any that do arrive in NY are now being sent to TN for processing.
Most of the events that had been received in NY before March 3rd have been processed (but not necessarily passed validation), most remaining events that hadn’t been processed yet have also been sent to TN for processing. (There are still a few unprocessed events remaining in NY, mostly ones that had diskette problems where the TD has already been asked to send a replacement diskette to NY, so it makes sense to keep the paperwork in NY until the replacement diskette arrives.)
No doubt there are plenty of reasons for the backlog, and we all need to be patient, but we’re curious too.
Here’s another example closer to home for me:
QUEEN OF HEARTS-33RD ANNUAL MONTGOMERY AL 2005-02-13 2005-02-17 A5006783 12480636
Received 2/17 and apparently not yet rated as of 3/27. Maybe some problem with the data, or maybe just part of the general backlog. No reason to jump through hoops for any one tourney though.
According to USCF records, that event was entered on March 11th but has an inconsistency in the crosstable records (a player ID appears twice, playing himself.) That makes the event unratable at this time.
I don’t have any information on whether the TD has been contacted about it yet, I’m still working on automating that part of the validation process, including logging the contacts so we know who was contacted and when.
Mike Nolan
Incidentally, one of the players in my tournaments that has two IDs has offered on more than one occasion to be a house player while he is playing in the same section. Perhaps it is something like this that caused him to get his second ID, but nevermind.
Is this possible with the new rating system, that is to be in the same section twice?
Alex Relyea
Sure, there’s nothing wrong with a player ID appearing more than once on the crosstable, for example in events with re-entries.
I also know that’s how quite a few TDs enter double round robins, entering each player twice.
Similarly, a player can play an opponent more than once, as in a double round robin. (If a player faces the same opponent more than twice, it makes him ineligible for bonus points for the event, though.)
However, a player CANNOT play a game against himself, and that’s what was wrong with the other event.
Your player with two IDs should contact the USCF had have one of those IDs flagged as a duplicate. (Or you can report the duplicate yourself.)
I think as a matter of policy that I would not want one of my participants also serving as a house player. Playing the odd extra game, maybe. (I tend to put extra games like that in a separate section, though that means it gets rated independently of the other games for those players.)