Rationale for Club TD's needing to take test to renew

Running Chess Tournaments
1

I haven’t been to a delegates meeting for a few years. However, recently two of the players at my club went to renew their Club TD certification so they could be back up TD’s.

USCF allows someone to become a Club TD just by saying that they have read the rulebook. After 3 years, a test is required to renew the certification. This makes little logical sense to me so I’m interested in the rationale.

Basically, someone can read the book and run free for 3 years, but after hopefully assisting or directing in events, then USCF wants to test the TD before allowing a renewal.

As a Local TD who just renewed the certification and was able to have the test waived because of having met the performance requirements, I’m curious why Club TD’s also aren’t allowed that option for their renewal.

2

The Local TDs (and higher) are allowed to renew based on activity because they have already passed a test showing that they know the rules to the extent that their level of directing requires. A Club TD that has passed a test can also renew based on activity. Club TDs that have never passed a test have not proven that they know the rules, so there is a time limit on how long they can direct without passing a test.

Jeff Wiewel
Current Chair TD Certification Committee

3

It is a sad truth that there are club TDs who have signed the form stating that the individual has read the Official Rules of Chess but who in reality would not recognize the rule book if it jumped up and bit them on the nose. (Yes, I have personal knowledge of two such cases.) The reality of the situation is that such club TDs simply sign the form (probably without reading it) and return it to USCF, get an account on the TD/A support area, get hold of pairing software, and start submitting rating reports to USCF. This does not mean the individuals in question are competent to make rulings in even simple cases. (This does not mean the individuals are not competent, either.)

This reflects a compromise between needing to ensure there are “directors” available in otherwise unserved or underserved areas and ensuring a TD demonstrates at least a minimum competency. After being allowed to direct for three years based on absolutely nothing more than a promise that he has read the rules and will follow them, the club TD should be able to pass a test with a 70% pass rate.

It’s worth thinking about that requirement for a moment. All we’re asking for is that the club TD be able to rule correctly in the simplest situations seven times out of ten. That also means we allow directors who will rule incorrectly in simple situations three times out of ten. The hope is that for “bread and butter” instances that make up the majority of claims a TD will face (flag fall, touch move, illegal move), the club TD will get these right. And, at the risk of sounding haughty or snobbish, I really have no qualms about telling someone who can not meet even that barrier “no, thanks” after three years of directing.

Then again, even passing a local TD test does not necessarily guarantee competency. I once had a local TD who was playing in an event I was directing ask me why he only got one half point for his bye when another player got a full point. I explained that he had requested a bye for that round, which only gave him a half point, while the other player in question had been paired out as there was an odd number of players to pair for that round. Until I explained this, the TD would give full point byes to players who requested byes. I saw in MSA one four round tournament this TD directed where a player had taken byes for the first three rounds and only played the last round. Having been given three full point byes, that player won the event outright with a score of 4.0.

Note that a club TD only has to pass an exam once, after his first three year term is up. Thereafter, a club TD may renew based on directing activity, just as other TDs may.

(Mr. Wiewel posted his reply while I was writing this tome. I apologize for any unintended duplication of his answer.)

4

Thanks for the replies. Although I don’t agree with them, at least I understand the rationale.

IMO, if a TD has been a club director for 3 years, has assisted or directed in “x” events and there have been no complaints, then I really don’t see the need to make them jump through a hoop on the second go round.

For now, there are two less certified TD’s in the world and if I hadn’t persuaded another individual to become one (without taking the test - so he’s good for 3 years), then the club might just have gone under if I died in the night.

Maybe I just need to find more book readers…

5

I submit that the requirement might also encourage those Club TD’s to apply for the Local TD certification.

If you have the experience, and have to take a test anyway, why not go for the next level?

6

I certainly feel your pain over losing two club TDs. On the other hand, again fully risking appearing haughty and snobbish, I admit I feel no sympathy for a club TD who finds taking a (typically 30 to 40 question) multiple choice exam once in a lifetime to be an insurmountable barrier. These days, it is not even necessary to receive and return the exam by US postal mail; the exam can be received and returned by e-mail.

There are some who believe that a club TD should be required to pass an exam before receiving certification and directing any events at all. A careful reading of the undercurrent of my earlier reply might lead the reader to believe that I agree with that opinion.

7

This has been discussed before, including a thread in Issues a few years ago. At one time new TDs had to pass an open-book test to get certified even at the Club level.*** That’s how I became a TD in the 1980s. I could argue either side of whether that is better than the current regs, with simply signing the form.

One wrinkle not widely known: The “Club” and “Local” TD tests are identical. If a Club TD does not have the required experience credits but scores at least 70%, (21/30) he is re-certified as Club. If he does have the proper experience and scores from 21-23, he is re-certified as Club…but if he both has the proper experience and scores 80% (24/30) or better, then he becomes a Local TD.

That happened to a friend of mine, who thought he was testing to re-certify at the Club level. He got a kick out of it. Maybe that might inspire your club-mates to take the test.

That, plus it’s free, open book, can be received and returned via email and completed at one’s leisure. And all it takes is 21/30 (open-book multiple choice) to pass. And once you pass, you need never take another test again if you stay active as a TD.

That’s a pretty low bar. I support anyone who helps keep club and local chess going, especially in small towns and small markets where rated chess is hard to find—but that’s a very low bar.

If someone truly finds that too much to ask, well…etc.

*** To be precise, I think the lowest level of TD certification back then (mid-'80s) was called Local, or at least something other than Club—which was added later, as I recall. The point is that once upon a time you could not get certified as a TD at the lowest level without taking a test.

8

I understand what you’re saying Eric. I guess I tend to be in the category of test first if folks think that’s necessary. To me, it makes little sense to let people go out there for 3 years without proving any knowledge of having read the book or the rules and then test them to let them continue when they’ve already been active.

However, I personally would rather have a “basic” category. Someone read the book, knows how to look up the rules, and could pinch hit when necessary.

In the end, does the current system encourage people to become TD’s. Yes, it says, come on in, but then it doesn’t encourage them to stay in. Maybe other clubs don’t have this issue. The thing here is we’re talking about a Club TD - pretty low level stuff and while many of you might not find the requirements onerous, I’ll say this…if I had to take the test to get my local TD certification renewed, I seriously was considering retiring from being a TD. I’d take it as a message from God that it was okay for me to just become a regular chess player too. I’ve got more important things to do in my life.

I am constantly recruiting for TD’s and consider myself fortunate to have found others willing to step up to the plate when they realized that I’m not a spring chicken and the chances of there being days when I have to be missing are going to increase as time goes on, not decrease. I’ve ordered books for 6 people and have 1 actually read it to become a TD. I know, some people will sign the form whether they have read the book or not, but others are honest about it. Even getting through the reading of the book is a chore.

And honestly, I use 20 pages tops of that rulebook - mostly to explain pairings, look up color rules, odd man byes, and how to pair a swiss using a round robin format. The rest of it is like reading an encyclopedia. And that test is going to have a boatload of questions on it that a Club TD will never ever ever need to know or will even use in their lifetime.

I do appreciate and understand the importance of all these rules if one is going to TD an event where players are playing for megabucks or some championship title, but if USCF wants Clubs to exist, how much harm can be done by letting someone run an event for 20 players. If the rating reports go in and none of the players have complained in three years, why is there a need to “test”?

Also, I’ve brought up this scenario to non-chess players and they just shake their heads at the lack of logic. Think of it this way, I have two experienced TD’s who cannot be TD’s at a MACA event this weekend which is short of help because they don’t have their certification renewed/haven’t found the time to take the tests/read the 6th edition rule changes. Instead, the one who has read the book but has never been a TD for an event can help.

Okay, I acknowledge defeat and will go back to doing what I can when I can. I’ll be at that tournament on Sunday to fill in because I have students playing in it. I can’t even be in the playing room because of that, but at least I can help in registration and with the new person at their first event…and shake my head.

9

I am hoping later this year to apply and take the ANTD test. I mention this as an indication of someone working up the ranks as a TD. However, I do doubt that I will ever aspire to NTD status. What is interesting is how I got my start as a TD.

Back in the 70’s my local club had about a half dozen players who were also qualified TDs at the time. However, the nightly [weekly] tournament that I directed was lacking a TD. For one reason or another none of the TDs were able to handle the first round. I was dragooned into doing the pairings, being told it was easy. I actually ended up doing the whole tournament. The thing is that I was not a TD, I did not own a rule book, but the club had a copy. I had never read the rule book and I probably would have been lost if some serious question had arisen. This was back before computer pairing programs.

My point is that could you, or the USCF, allow for volunteers to do some of the work for you in directing a tournament? I know that some scholastic events use volunteer workers at the events. The volunteers handle minor issues, such as score keeping & results, but call on an experienced TD for the more serious and technical issues. Create an assistant Club TD. Someone to help out at small club events, then require a test to upgrade to a Club TD. Something to show very basic knowledge of running/TDing an event.

Larry S. Cohen

10

Larry,

I think if someone took a survey on how they became a TD, there would probably be an overwhelming majority of people who stepped in because the person “who always did it” couldn’t do it for whatever reason and so they stepped in.

I’ve had some offline discussions with people and IMO, there are two groups. One is the ones who don’t want inexperienced TD’s to show up at a national event to direct when they really don’t have a clue. And then people like me who want to plan a legacy for keeping the club going the day I can’t or choose not to.

There are a lot of people willing to “assist”. They don’t really “want to” be TD’s, but they don’t want to risk showing up to play and finding out that it won’t be rated because there’s nobody else there to do it.

I don’t want to always have to be “it”. Hence I have a great deal of empathy for my fellow players who don’t want to study or surf through a 300+ page rulebook of things that they will never use in order to take a test so they can fill in for a night every so often.

The issue really goes back to why do they have to? Why does someone who is handling a 20 player event really need to have to go through that? Honestly, I’ve used 20 pages of that rulebook and the rest is pretty meaningless for the average club.

The club has been in existence since 2001. We’ve managed. I created the club because the last one in the area - well, the guy got tired of organizing and as he said, “just wanted to play chess”. At some point, I envision the same. Maybe then, someone will find the time to go through the rulebook, etc., but basically USCF is not conducive to planting the seeds for the future.

11

The questionable thing, in my opinion, is letting a Club TD direct tournaments for 3 years before being tested. I can imagine some value in having an introductory TD certification which allows a newcomer to direct small tournaments for limited period before taking a certification exam (effectively learning by doing), but I’d be inclined to make this period one year, rather than 3 years. But it’s possible that the introductory period was made 3 years in the hope that it would enable more TDs to qualify as Local TDs (instead of Club TDs) when they take the exam. That, at least, is what happened with me.

This I don’t understand. If someone has read the book, knows how to look up the rules, and can pinch hit as a TD when necessary, why can’t they look up the rules and pinch hit as a TD on a certification exam?

I don’t recall there being a “boatload” of irrelevant questions on the Club/Local TD exam. I have, at one time or another, needed to reference a sizeable fraction of the USCF rulebook.

Well, keep in mind that players (unlike TDs) aren’t required to have even read the rulebook, so why would the fact that none of them have ever complained mean anything? They probably just assumed that since the TDs were USCF-certified, whatever they said must be correct. And doesn’t the USCF have an obligation to insure that that’s actually true?

Bob

12

Bob, the person who has been my assistant TD for several years, has 73 sections and 55 events under his belt. Pray tell, why does USCF require that he has to take an exam now? The reality is that I’ve now lost an assistant TD who was fine by USCF standards for the past three years. He doesn’t have the time to take the exam because life is simply in the way and his reason for being a TD was to help me out. Now that a new person who has never TD’d has signed a form after reading the rule book and is “certified”, the experienced TD doesn’t feel a need to make this a priority. I don’t think he’s the only TD that fits this category.

In any case, I concede. USCF isn’t about to change its ways. Taking my hand back out of the crazy.

13

Good.

It is not unreasonable for holders of a directing credential to occasionally demonstrate that they have actually read the rulebook. The club level TD exam is a minimal demonstration that ought not require significant time.

USCF and its members are well served when club TDs who refuse to demonstrate that they have read the rulebook have their credentials lapse.

14

Send a quick email to USCF requesting exam (1 minute). Get exam back in email, and print it out (2 minutes).
Take exam, and rulebook (since it is open book) along to tournament(s), complete exam during tournament(s). Send exam back in (2 minutes). Done!

tom

15

Mr. Langland assumes that said TD is not a playing TD. Above evidence suggests the contrary.

Alex Relyea

16

That could be true… For me, I found that bringing my tests (local - NTD) to a tournament with me, kept me in the moment, thinking about chess, thinking about the rules, thinking about exceptions to the rules, and allowed me to successfully focus on the questions.

tom

17

I’m gonna have to call bullhocky on this. If he doesn’t have time to take the Local test, he doesn’t have time to direct; it should not be all that time consuming for a person of his experience. Furthermore, he can’t feel jerked around by the newbie, who has no experience, as he, himself, had that same opportunity at one time. This seems nefarious to me why he refuses to take the test.

BTW: though this isn’t part of the case, I also don’t like the idea of Locals remaining Locals when they’re directing 500 player sections, even though they have been doing it for 20 years.

18

First of all, you completely ignore the fact that he isn’t the one voicing a complaint. He is perfectly willing to take the test - some day - when he has time - when life isn’t in the way. He happens to love chess and plays it. He became a TD to be helpful to me in order to relieve some of the stress in managing the club. So, please don’t cast aspersions on the character of this great guy for having stepped up to the plate in the past. There’s nothing nefarious there and he’s not refusing to take the test. It’s me who sees little point in it.

Secondly, he is ecstatic that the newbie is online because now he doesn’t feel as if he has to take the test anytime soon. There is one person to fill in when I’m on vacation or if I die in the night so it doesn’t have to be him and he can spend his time doing things he enjoys more - like playing chess.

Lastly, I’m the one who is concerned that if life gets in my way, the only person running the club which I’ve worked on for the past 14 years is going to be the newbie and if he doesn’t feel up to the task, goodbye club. Well, then the others might feel compelled to take the test or maybe there will be one less chess club in the USA. Life will go on.

In any case, it’s obvious that my concern for having people to run chess events in my area isn’t going to be resolved by anyone here. It is what it is and I accept that. There’s nothing more to say.

I’m unsubscribing from the thread so feel free to have the last say as you wish.

19

Thanks :smiley:

20

I have never known a club td seeking to renew at club fail the exam.
Really, it is rare that they do not renew to local, anyhow. And I truly prefer they do this, for it makes it easier for me to hire them for floor
help at larger tournaments.

Rob Jones
Senior TD