Recently some of the students in my scholastic clubs have become USCF members at a rated scholastic tournament. Unfortunately, they didn’t get to play as USCF members in that event because the organizer made them play in the non-rated section. He did this because he didn’t have online access at the site to process their membership and get an ID for them.
So now I have these new members who probably won't ever play in a rated event and yet are USCF members. Because rated events cost at least twice the amount they would have paid, it's very unlikely that they will ever play before their membership expires.
What I'd like to do is hold a small rated tourney for them so they can get a rating and also compete with other established USCF members and do so at a price of $10-$15. The problem is finding a TD who will do this. I think I could become a club TD, but since I was one about 20 years ago, I don't think I'm allowed to apply for it again.
Any suggestions?
They’ll let you become a club TD again. I think they recently changed the rules to allow this (though in practice, I’m not sure they ever enforced the rule).
I’d be happy to TD for you, but the chances of you being anywhere close to where I live is pretty small.
I suspect the rule against renewing club TDs was very inconsistently enforced, which was why I urged that the rule be changed to something that we CAN consistently enforce as well as to something that gave us a path for club TDs with insufficient directing experience to move up to the local level.
A Club TD certificate can now be renewed for another three years by taking an exam. (I think it is currently the same exam as for the local test but with a lower passing grade, but that may not always be the case.)
Lapsed/expiring Club TDs with sufficient directing experience are encouraged to take the Local TD exam and move up to Local TD status. Unlike the Club TD level, Local, Senior and ANTD certificates will be renewed automatically providing the TD has sufficient recent directing experience.
What type of event were you looking to do? If you just want to do a small school event that is rated, then everyone kicks in $1 to cover the rating fees and you have at it. (after you get yourself re-established as a Club TD, or find a willing volunteer.)
If you want them playing against other USCF members, then you have to decide what your target is. Are you looking for them to play other schools? (So basically you want to hold your own scholastic) Or are you wanting them to play a mix of students and adults? Is there possibly a local chess club that would meet your kids for a 4 round event, possibly over a few weeks?
You can’t set the entry fee until you decide what it is that you want to do. If you are focusing on kids, then as long as you can play at your school for free, then you can keep it cheap and get a few trophies. If you want to attract a lot of other players, you need prizes and you will have to set the entry fee at a level to support them.
By the way, why wouldn’t the director of the event let them play in the rated section? You say that he didn’t have online access and the ability to process their memberships. So??? If someone comes up to an organizer with $$ in hand, you take the money, enter them in, go home and process them with the tournament. If you have no internet access, then mail the membership fees in with the tournament report. The only way that it would be justified to put them in a non rated section would be if your kids said that they had just paid for memberships, but had no proof of membership with them.
Online access is not required to run rated events, though the suggestions some have made here might eventually make that necessary. (That would be a BIG mistake, IMHO.)
It would be interesting to hear the TD’s explanation for why he wouldn’t let those players in a rated section.
Actually, I don’t really know why he didn’t let them play in the rated section, but I’ll ask when I see him this weekend.
What I’m wanting to do is run a simple event for those kids who are USCF members but haven’t played a rated game yet, and have some other students within our school district who are rated take part so there’s a large enough group to make it worthwhile.
I’m thinking right now I would have probably 8-10 players, small entry fee, and very little in the way of prizes. Of these players, there are only two or three who are not rated, and the others would have a chance to pick up or drop a few points. The highest rated player I think would be rated 962, so you can see how this is working out.
I had considered just having them do matches, but I think it would be more interesting as a mini-tournament. I could do it in four rounds on a weekend. All players are spread out among three different schools.
It is best for new players to face as many different opponents as possible during their ‘provisional’ period, because that will produce a rating that is a good indication of their playing strength.
Also, under the recently revised rules for two-player matches, both players must have published established ratings.
Rather than get the TD’s explanation and repost it, why not invite him to post his explanation here himself? We often find that second-hand reports miss important details.
Not all chess players are in a large base for active USCF members. Not all chess players have the time to travel just to find a small tournament. Nolan you should understand this, as you are in a small state with a small base of active members. It would be had for a scholastic player in your state to find the scholastic tournaments.
Scholastic players find it harder to find scholastic tournaments only. Most of the small scholastic tournaments are chess players that know or play with each other. What he wants to do is nice, as it give the scholastic players someone willing to let them play a rated game at the players time and the players travel limit.
Doug, the primary goal of the ratings system is to predict results based on a comparison of two players’ ratings.
That prediction is far more accurate if those ratings are based on playing many different players than if they are based on playing just a few players many times.
The size of the local player base may enter into how POSSIBLE it is to have a provisional player compete against a number of different players, not how DESIRABLE it is.
According to USCF records, there are 49 active players within 25 miles of Wyoming MI, where many of your events are held. There are 59 active players within 25 miles of Lincoln NE. I would think that in both cases that’s enough active players to give new players a sufficently large number of opponents upon which to base their rating.
Glad I have 49 active players within 25 miles. Within that 25 miles, there is East Grand Rapids 10,764 (2000 census) Grandville 10,764 (2000 census) Grand Rapids 197,800 (2000 census), Kentwood 45255 (2000 census) Walker 21842 (2000 census) Wyoming 69,368 (2000 census). If you just take in the six cities, that is over 355,000, plus the smaller cities within the twenty-five miles.
Think of it this way, Wyoming Michigan has more people within 25 miles from the city than the state of Wyoming. Yes, building a base and it takes years to build. If we talk USCF members out of having a small tournament because the population is so small with a small base of USCF members. Than the USCF is only going to be important to the large population areas of the nation.