Reasons for not USCF rating events

[Micah_Smith]

@BobMessenger

The real problem with making the U.S. Open FIDE rated is that the whole tournament (other than side events) is in a single section, which means having to register dozens or quite possibly hundreds of players with FIDE.

Similar arguments have been made for not USCF rating events (having to check every players membership, collect USCF dues, etc.)

[Micah_Smith]

@relyea

No, but what did happen is that FIDE required all TDs to be licensed arbiters. That could make the cost prohibitive, and I’d imagine a significant number of players would see minimal or no benefit.

Alex Relyea

The cost of being a USCF TD (USCF membership requirement) is another argument used to not USCF rating events either.

@jwiewel

It would also require using FIDE rules so that K+R could lose on time to K+N.

So? I don’t see that as a big issue.

[relyea]

@Micah Smith

@relyea

No, but what did happen is that FIDE required all TDs to be licensed arbiters. That could make the cost prohibitive, and I’d imagine a significant number of players would see minimal or no benefit.

Alex Relyea

The cost of being a USCF TD (USCF membership requirement) is another argument used to not USCF rating events either.

I don’t understand.

Alex Relyea

[BrianYangUSChess]

@Micah Smith

@relyea

No, but what did happen is that FIDE required all TDs to be licensed arbiters. That could make the cost prohibitive, and I’d imagine a significant number of players would see minimal or no benefit.

Alex Relyea

The cost of being a USCF TD (USCF membership requirement) is another argument used to not USCF rating events either.

… you had to pay to become an USCF TD? — please. What did you actually have to “pay” to US Chess to be a USCF TD?

Did you pay a licensing fee? (20 euros for FIDE just to “be” an arbiter) No
Did you pay an examination fee for your local TD test? ($75 dollars for my FIDE arbiter’s seminar + class time + exam time) No
Did you pay the upgrade to local-level fee? (80 euros from NA to FA, Category D) No

I feel sorry for the Portland Chess Club members who pay $85 dollars a year for a Vice-President that doesn’t want to US Chess rate anything because he had to “pay” to be a US Chess TD.

… oh… no wonder the club is seeking more TD’s to direct their weekly tournaments…

[Micah_Smith]

@AsianAcerook

I feel sorry for the Portland Chess Club members who pay $85 dollars a year for a Vice-President that doesn’t want to US Chess rate anything because he had to “pay” to be a US Chess TD.

… oh… no wonder the club is seeking more TD’s to direct their weekly tournaments…

I suggest you go back and re-read what I said a little more closely. I never said I don’t want to rate anything in US Chess because the US Chess membership fee is required to be a TD. I just said that is an argument that has been used.

[seki]

I suggest you go back and re-read what I said a little more closely. I never said I don’t want to rate anything in US Chess because the US Chess membership fee is required to be a TD. I just said that is an argument that has been used.

Chess players are just cheap!

[BrianYangUSChess]

@Micah Smith

I suggest you go back and re-read what I said a little more closely. I never said I don’t want to rate anything in US Chess because the US Chess membership fee is required to be a TD. I just said that is an argument that has been used.

*yawns… so who else, other than you, have mentioned this argument? NWSRS TDs? Go figure.

As for the US Open being FIDE rated, the multiple schedules is probably the reason why FIDE wouldn’t want to rate it (for norm purposes) and that was mostly what the top players wished the tournament was FIDE rated. It would require the “9-day schedule” be a separate section which kinda defeats the purpose of an US Open (one section).

Best,
Acerook

[Micah_Smith]

@relyea

@Micah Smith

@wintdoan

Are you suggesting that we should FIDE rate the US Open?

Yes

Why? To put it more clearly, what is the benefit?

Alex Relyea

(I’d agree if you said Denker, Barber, and whatever the new name is for NGIT).

What is the benefit of rating beginner scholastic tournaments in the Northwest in US Chess rather than the NWSRS?

@wilecoyote

The games for the shorter schedules are played at a time control that is unacceptable for FIDE (standard) rating, and it is not allowed to rate some games rapid and others standard. There is also considerable effort for the office to prepare a FIDE rating report that separates out those games.

SwissSys 9 has an option to “Exclude this section’s games from FIDE reports after merging”.

[Micah_Smith]

@eastside

In addition, the US Open will almost certainly be run with WinTD (as are most other US Chess national events). WinTD does not, AFAIK, currently have the same functionality as SwissSys 9 that would ease Mrs. Vibbert’s burden in creating a Krause report.

Just switch to SwissSys, problem solved.

@eastside

Then, there is the question of ensuring that every US Open participant is registered with FIDE, to avoid unregistered player fees.

A similar argument can be made about not USCF rating events. “There is the question of ensuring that every participant has current US Chess membership, to avoid the correction fee.”

[wintdoan]

@Micah Smith

@eastside

Then, there is the question of ensuring that every US Open participant is registered with FIDE, to avoid unregistered player fees.

A similar argument can be made about not USCF rating events. “There is the question of ensuring that every participant has current US Chess membership, to avoid the correction fee.”

One argument against buying a used Chevy Vega is that it gets lousy gas mileage. A similar argument can be made about buying a Lamborghini.

[wintdoan]

@Micah Smith

@wintdoan

Are you suggesting that we should FIDE rate the US Open?

Yes but the main reason for my posts was to point out that several of the reasons given here on why we shouldn’t FIDE rate it can also be made for not USCF rating events either.

A more pertinent question is whether you are planning to play in the 2016 US Open? If you’re not, then why should you care? (That’s rhetorical).

[Mulfish]

@Micah Smith

@wintdoan

Are you suggesting that we should FIDE rate the US Open?

Yes but the main reason for my posts was to point out that several of the reasons given here on why we shouldn’t FIDE rate it can also be made for not USCF rating events either.

They can be made, but not intelligently. Only philosophically. If something costs a buck extra to do if you USCF rate an event that is a minor impediment. If it costs $1000 extra if you FIDE rate it that’s a much more relevant factor. Why are you not willing or able to see that, Micah?

And of course the unacceptable to line controls in the alternate time schedule is a uniquely FIDE situation that has no counterpart in USCF ratings. Why do you refuse to recognize that, Micah?

[Micah_Smith]

@BobMessenger

@Micah Smith

@eastside

The question of whether the US Open should be rated by US Chess is on topic? I sorrowfully admit that I can’t see that - since US Chess does not pay any fees (rating, correction or otherwise) for its own national events.

I suggest you go back and re-read what I said a little more closely. I never brought up the question about whether the US Open should be rated by US Chess.

Anything not related to the US Open doesn’t belong in this topic.

Yes but all of my posts have related in some way. My posts about not rating events in US Chess relate to this topic because they are simply a rebuttal to some of the arguments made about not FIDE rating the US Open.

@eastside

I read this post, and its follow-ups. The “similar argument” you made there gives direct rise to the question of whether the US Open should be rated by US Chess. Unfortunately, I don’t think I can handle reading your “argumentation” beyond that. I’ll leave that to hardier constitutions than mine.

No, I was simply bringing up that a similar argument can be made about not rating events in US Chess in general. I said nothing specifically about the US Open.

@Mulfish

They can be made, but not intelligently. Only philosophically. If something costs a buck extra to do if you USCF rate an event that is a minor impediment. If it costs $1000 extra if you FIDE rate it that’s a much more relevant factor. Why are you not willing or able to see that, Micah?

Yes, but it’s not $1 vs $1,000 here.

[Mulfish]

@Micah Smith

@Mulfish

They can be made, but not intelligently. Only philosophically. If something costs a buck extra to do if you USCF rate an event that is a minor impediment. If it costs $1000 extra if you FIDE rate it that’s a much more relevant factor. Why are you not willing or able to see that, Micah?

Yes, but it’s not $1 vs $1,000 here.

The exact numbers don’t matter. The barriers to uscf rating events are nowhere near as material to those events as the barriers to FIDE eating the US Open are. So your rhetorical comparison demonstrates only foolish thinking.

[eastside]

Just to amplify Mr. Mulford’s point…

First, one cannot even enter a US Chess national event online without having a membership that would be current throughout the tournament, thanks to the validation routine that is standard in the US Chess online entry portal. So, there would be no correction fees from that source.

Second, as stated earlier, US Chess does not pay any rating-related fees for rating its own events. So, even if a non-member were to play in a national event, the Federation would just waive the correction fee. (Of course, anyone who has ever observed Kim Cramer, Susan Kantor or other US Chess staffers working Chess Control at a national event will get a chuckle out of the idea that they would miss an expired membership when processing a non-electronic entry.)

So, in summary, the financial barriers to US Chess rating its own national events are - quite literally - imaginary.

[Micah_Smith]

@eastside

Just to amplify Mr. Mulford’s point…

First, one cannot even enter a US Chess national event online without having a membership that would be current throughout the tournament, thanks to the validation routine that is standard in the US Chess online entry portal. So, there would be no correction fees from that source.

Second, as stated earlier, US Chess does not pay any rating-related fees for rating its own events. So, even if a non-member were to play in a national event, the Federation would just waive the correction fee. (Of course, anyone who has ever observed Kim Cramer, Susan Kantor or other US Chess staffers working Chess Control at a national event will get a chuckle out of the idea that they would miss an expired membership when processing a non-electronic entry.)

So, in summary, the financial barriers to US Chess rating its own national events are - quite literally - imaginary.

Yes but I don’t think anyone has suggested in this thread that their are financial barriers to US Chess rating its own national events

[Mulfish]

Mr Reed’s amplification unfortunately allowed Mr. Smith oto ignore the point again. The barriers to uscf rating the events he refuses to uscf rate pale compared to the barriers to FIDE rating the us open, so his repeated rhetorical comparisons are asinine.

[BrianYangUSChess]

@Micah Smith

Yes but I don’t think anyone has suggested in this thread that their are financial barriers to US Chess rating its own national events

…Earlier in the threads:

@Micah Smith

The cost of being a USCF TD (USCF membership requirement) is another argument used to not USCF rating events either.

@Micah Smith

Yes but the main reason for my posts was to point out that several of the reasons given here on why we shouldn’t FIDE rate it can also be made for not USCF rating events either.

@Micah Smith

@eastside

Then, there is the question of ensuring that every US Open participant is registered with FIDE, to avoid unregistered player fees.

A similar argument can be made about not USCF rating events. “There is the question of ensuring that every participant has current US Chess membership, to avoid the correction fee.”

Oops.

[Mulfish]

No Brian, even there Micah is still talking about not rating uscf events in an abstract way, not in the context of the us open. He is comparing watermelons to peas.

[Micah_Smith]

@AsianAcerook

@Micah Smith

Yes but I don’t think anyone has suggested in this thread that their are financial barriers to US Chess rating its own national events

…Earlier in the threads:

@Micah Smith

The cost of being a USCF TD (USCF membership requirement) is another argument used to not USCF rating events either.

@Micah Smith

Yes but the main reason for my posts was to point out that several of the reasons given here on why we shouldn’t FIDE rate it can also be made for not USCF rating events either.

@Micah Smith

@eastside

Then, there is the question of ensuring that every US Open participant is registered with FIDE, to avoid unregistered player fees.

A similar argument can be made about not USCF rating events. “There is the question of ensuring that every participant has current US Chess membership, to avoid the correction fee.”

Oops.

Yes and as I stated earlier, this is referring to rating US Chess events in general, not US Chess National events.