Their is a player who recently in two different two-day tournaments took a zero point bye (once in round 1 and once in round 3) and a half point bye in round 5 (only 1 half point bye was allowed). (I think the reason he took these byes is because he didn’t want to play more than two games on the first day and wanted to get home earlier on the second day). Taking the byes in this order gave him easier parings. What do you think about having a rule that states you have to take the half point bye first to prevent a player from manipulating the system to get easier pairings? A player can still take a zero point bye without having taken a half point bye but then they would be ineligible for requesting a half point bye later on. This would prevent a player from requesting a zero point bye and only later requesting a half point bye to get around the rule.
Nothing prevents the local organizer from doing this currently. They just need to advertize it so that the players know ahead of time. But it seems like in your example the player was just trying to get some rated games in, not game the system.
This is yet another idea that should never become a USCF rule, but which organizers should feel free to implement (with proper advance notice) if they wish.
Bill Smythe
Do we know for SURE that the player requested and received zero point byes, or is that just how the crosstable is being interpreted without direct information from either the player or the TD on what actually happened?
BTW, a zero point bye does not GUARANTEE that the player gets an easier pairing in the next round.
I assume your complaint is not really about the zero point bye, but about the last round 1/2 point bye. Some organizers permit those, many (maybe most?) don’t. It’s very common that if they are allowed, they have to be (a) requested in advance and (b) be irrevocable so someone can’t put in for a last round 1/2 point and take it if 1/2 point would be useful and play if they need a full point.
Whether it makes sense to allow last round 1/2 points will depend quite a bit upon the structure of the tournament—if money can only go to very high scores (a class tournament for instance) a 1/2 point bye to which you must commit in advance is not necessarily an advantage. On the other hand, if relatively modest scores can win prizes (class prizes in an open tournament) then a low rated player would probably be well-served to take such a bye since if he/she were in contention for a class prize after round N-1, they would almost certainly be paired up in the last round. The decision about how many 1/2 point byes to allow and under what conditions is left to the organizers who know what will work for their tournament. If it creates what are seen as inequities (Joel Benjamin once won $$$$ at the Chicago Open taking 1/2 points for both Monday rounds), the policy gets adjusted.
Another offer of a solution without a problem. Why this need to take away flexibility from players and TDs in the running of a tournament? The example indicated does not appear to show the individual is trying to “game” the system. Zero point byes and half point byes work against the player’s prize interests. People only request zero point byes when they do not care about prizes and do not expect to win one. They treat the tournament as part of a vacation; they are sightseeing or doing other things rather than play chess for a particular round.
The first time I worked the National Open, I asked what the limit was for half point byes. The short answer was “6”. A very high percentage of the field took at least one evening round off and there were more than a few who took every evening round off. Gee. I wondering what they were doing in Las Vegas rather than playing chess?
The day I sign up for chess in Vegas I intend to take the evening rounds off to enjoy the town at night while wallowing in chess during the day.
After you hit Vegas at night all you will be doing is wallowing in chess during the day. Might even miss the morning round. Just don’t wake up with a tiger in your room.
Or maybe the player works the 3rd shift, and didn’t want to get up early Saturday; he then played Saturday afternoon and then had to work in the evening, played the slightly later morning round on Sunday and couldn’t play the last round due to work - so the TD gave him a half point bye.
In general I would say a 1/2 point bye should never be offered in the last round. There is no reason other than prize money to ask for a 1/2 point bye in the final round. Any moderately experienced player can figure out (even before most events begin) if he is likely to need a 1/2 point bye in the final round to have a good chance at prizes. In my area there used to be a player that regularly took the 1/2 point bye in the last round. He was one of the higher rated players so he was paired down for the 1st three rounds then dodged all the tough players in the last round. Even if he had a good reason for needing that last round bye it meant he was coasting in with a prize while the remaining players had to fight it out with a loss meaning they go home empty handed. Even for lower rated players they can still figure it out. If your rating is just above the middle of the event you can figure you will be paired down then up then down then up. So in a 4 round event a last round bye gives them a good chance of the top prize in their group.
I think you hit the nail on the head here in regard to the structure of the tournament. But, also, many organizers have protocols which have long been in place and are readily accepted for their local weekly
events. One size fits all is generally not a good fit for USCF.
Rob Jones
Yes, at least in one of the two tournaments.
True, get it greatly increases the chances.
No, it’s about the order in taking a zero point bye and a half point bye.
People need to stop using this statement so much on this forum! People think they are so smart and cool when they use a fancy statement like this. This is similar to people who use the word ‘guesstimate’.
Why does there need to be flexibility on the order a player can take a zero point bye and a half point bye?
He did ‘game’ the system to get easier pairings. Why else would he take the zero point bye before the half point bye?
There are number of other reasons why a player might ask for a last round 1/2 bye. What if you have another commitment and can’t play the final round?
Do you know what “solution without a problem” and “guesstimate” mean when used? If you do, I think I would leave it at that. I seriously doubt that they are going for “cool” or “smart.” And I doubt that many others would call these “fancy statements.”
Some others might have peeves about failing to edit a post before pressing “submit” or in not understanding the differences between “their,” “they’re,” and “there.” It’s probably best to just keep these peeves to oneself.
As a TD, I like to have the flexibility to assign one or more 1/2 point byes depending on the type of tournament and when the bye is requested. In an unrated club championship, I will allow players to take a 1/2 point bye if they are going to miss a round. The reason does not matter; maybe their kids have soccer games that night or they have to work overtime and miss a round. If a player requests a half point bye in the last round, I might view a request in a trophy tournament differently than in a tournament with cash prizes.
I am not being “fancy” with the use of language. You very specifically want rules to govern all sorts of actions that have been under the purview of “director discretion.” This clutters the rulebook and makes it harder to run tournaments. As an organizer/TD it is my money and reputation on the line. I want as much control of the tournament environment as I can to have a successful tournament. That is, one that is profitable and convenient for the needs of the players. Your solutions cause problems, not fix them.
As a tournament player with over 1000 events under my belt, I would like to have the chance on occasion to take a 1/2 point bye when I go to a tournament. Maybe it is because I don’t like to play three games in a day. Or I have spent all day in meetings and workshops at a US Open and need a break. Maybe I want to sightsee for a change. If I don’t have the flexibility to take a bye because of some officious little toady waving a rulebook quoting your latest rule, I would soon as not play at all. I will vote with my dollars and find a tournament more amenable to my needs and desires.
My proposal would only prevent a player from taking a 1/2 point bye if they have already taken a zero point bye so in the situations you mentioned, players would still be able to take 1/2 byes except in the unlikely scenario that they have already taken a zero point bye. This is to prevent players who know they are going to take a zero point bye and a half point bye from trying to ‘game’ the system by originally requesting only a zero point bye and then once the zero-point bye round is over, requesting a half point bye in an attempt to get easier pairings by having the zero point bye applied first.
First, if a player is going to take zero point byes and 1/2 byes just to get easier pairings, he has taken himself out of the running for prizes. It that is what he wants to do, so what?
Second, taking byes of any sort does not necessarily give a player easier pairings. I watched one guy miscalculate, take a 1/2 point bye to avoid tougher pairings and then found himself playing a 2600+ player who had miscued the previous round.
Third, most bye requests are made before the first round and are irrevocable. Clairvoyance is not a strong suit among chess players.
Fourth, it is in the discretion of a tournament director to grant or deny such bye requests.
I was at some point going to point out that Micah is consistent in misspelling “there” as “their” so consistent does not imply either correct or desirable.
You’re OK with someone losing the first game (or first two or first four) and then getting a 1/2 in the last round, but we need a rule to prevent someone from voluntarily taking a zero in the first round and then getting a 1/2 in the last round. Am I understanding that correctly?
Yes. If they are voluntarily taking a zero point bye and a half point bye, they can take them in the opposite order so they don’t ‘game’ the system in an attempt to get easier pairings. If they take a zero point bye and are given a half point bye by the TD in the last round, then that is OK.