TD Certification - Observations and Ideas

Running Chess Tournaments
1

I am currently working to advance my TD certification level. I am currently a local TD and working to get to senior. I am learning as I go but had a few observations on things that have worked well for me so far. Here they are in no particular order:

1.) There are many tournaments where an experienced TD may be looking for an assistant. I have found these are great opportunities to not only gain some experience credit, if there is availability, but also to observe and ask questions as to what has, and has not, worked for the experienced TD. It also helps the tournament.

2.) Money is tight with expenses involved in running a tournament. If one is willing to volunteer, at no cost to the experienced TD, there are many opportunities to gain experience.

3.) National Scholastics are a good place to volunteer as a “volunteer”, not TD, in order to see many different NTD’s and their problem solving methods. In some cases it may be possible to volunteer for a floor TD position working as a helper to the Section Chief. Here one can be involved in more rulings in an afternoon than 5 years as an adult open tournament TD.

4.) Having an experienced TD (or 2 or 3) as a mentor to ask questions and share experiences with has been helpful to me. I have been fortunate to have 3 NTDs to share ideas with.

I am planning to run a few tournaments of my own over the next year. The 4 items above have given me a good idea as to what to expect. Asking questions and observing other more experienced TDs has been a good compliment in my situation to understanding the rulebook. This has been more helpful to me than just organizing a bunch of tournaments. I view it as an apprentiship.

Do you have other suggestions or ideas that have worked for you?

Regards,

Dave

PS - I feel the Local TD written test was well done. It forced one to closely review the rules. NO it was not easy and every answer is not written in black and white in the Rulebook but the test matches real tournament situations where not every ruling has a black and white answer on page #.

PSS - The TD Tips in the current edition of the rulebook are helpful and share some of the experience component I find helpful and listed in my 4 items above.

2

[quote=“David K. Sachs”]
I am currently working to advance my TD certification level. I am currently a local TD and working to get to senior. I am learning as I go but had a few observations on things that have worked well for me so far. Here they are in no particular order:

1.) There are many tournaments where an experienced TD may be looking for an assistant. I have found these are great opportunities to not only gain some experience credit, if there is availability, but also to observe and ask questions as to what has, and has not, worked for the experienced TD. It also helps the tournament.
Do you have other suggestions or ideas that have worked for you?

/quote]
You still need 10 events where you are Chief TD of Category C tournaments plus 400 entrants in 10 or more events before you can apply for the test. Will that be easy to achieve in a few years?

3

No, not easy but representative. You can be a section chief of a 50 player section working for the overall chief in a larger tournament. In my area of the country (midwest) 50 player sections are fairly common (not every day but a couple each month) . I am not looking to set a speed record - just to get there eventually. I do not see the 10 tournament rule as an issue and I see it as representative of what the requirements should be for the senior TD level of certification.

I also believe you are reading the experience requirement incorrectly. You are required to be have 10 tournaments - 5 of which must be 50 player events and an additional 5 events such that the total player count of the 10 tournaments is 400. There are some qualifications on these tournaments which the rulebook explains better than I can.

4 
  Thanks, I did read the rules incorrectly.
      Unfortunately 50 players events are uncommon in my area and you probably have to organize them yourself to have any chance of being Chief TD. In my experience Senior TDs are quite a bit better than Locals. I question the wisdom of making the experience requirement so difficult before you can even take the exam. It almost seems like an exclusive club and I'll bet the ranks of Seniors is aging fast. I suggest that USCF needs to be proactive in developing more Seniors and higher.
5

David has made some excellent points.

Bob, I am not sure that it is up to the USCF to be proactive to develop Senior TDs. I personally feel that the experience requirements are fair enough and not terribly difficult. On the other hand, they should be somewhat difficult. After all, we should expect a Senior TD to be experienced and knowledgeable. It takes a lot of events, under different conditions, to attain such experience. I also believe that a TD should be proactive, if he or she desires to advance.

When I started as a Club TD in 2001, I organized and directed my own events. I took off from work early once a week to volunteer at a local Elementary School where I not only coached, but also organized and directed scholastic events for the kids, neither for pay. I contacted other schools in the County and found out what other schools had chess clubs. After that, I organized and directed countywide events. Eventually, I got involved in adult events as well and always took the opportunity, as David suggests, to learn from more experienced TDs.

Now I am in a position to mentor other TDs. When I am the Chief of a State or National event, I insist that my TDs be knowledgeable (or willing to learn) and efficient. Good people skills are a must – treat all players with respect regardless of the situation, whether they are students in Kindergarten or Grandmasters; at a small club event or at the US Championship. I also insist that my TDs show a sense of urgency. I do not like TDs to get “absorbed” in analyzing an interesting game while they are ignoring other players whose hands may be up! After getting the result of a game, do not tell a player how he or she could have won or lost – you are not there for that! Basically, I want a TD to be a total professional in his or her approach of the duties of directing an event! If you do this, the Chief TD or organizer will notice you, and you will get more opportunities.

Remember that famous segment of JFK’s inaugural address in 1961: “…ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Something like that, I think, applies here – it is not up to the USCF to be proactive in developing us, it is up to us to be proactive and seek opportunities to develop ourselves and, along the way, we will be helping the USCF and chess in general. The more we help the USCF, the more opportunities (for TDs) we create.

Yes, “mentorship” is a key ingredient in advancement. Get in touch with an NTD in your area and let him or her know that you are interested in helping and learning. Seek opportunities at the local and state levels. Get to know those who are in leadership positions at your State Association. Once you are more knowledgeable, bid on State events. I am sure all NTDs have organized many events.

I will add – Do not let an opportunity go by just because it may not “punch your ticket.” Inasmuch as it may seem like the experience requirements are too high, most of us had a lot more than what was required (for advancement), at all levels. Besides, even if you do not need to direct an event (to punch your ticket), you will always learn something from the experience!

Now, I realize that in certain parts of the country, there are not many opportunities. More the reason to get involved with local schools and clubs in order to organize events!

Good luck.

6 
David, in my state the experience requirement is "terribly difficult" since there are so very few Cat C events. The *only* higher level active TD in my area is a Senior  and I have been  mentored by him. When I play, I find that Club and Locals are not nearly as good since, at most, they only need to take an open book exam. I believe USCF has a responsibility to be proactive so better TDs are produced. I think the experience factor at bigger events is overrated and that requirement should be adjusted downward.

Bob

7

Coach Bob,

I am somewhat puzzled. You state that “When I play, I find that Club and Locals are not nearly as good since, at most, they only need to take an open book exam.” Yet, you want to make the experience requirements easier? That does not follow… Since you want easier experience requirements, do you want a much harder test? Closed book, perhaps?

Perhaps the reason why you have only Senior TDs, or below, in your area is, well, because that is all you need (to handle the attendance). All I am saying is that we need to promote chess and organize events at the local level to increase attendance. Other than lowering membership fees, I am not sure what else the USCF could do. We have a website, a monthly magazine, and the ability to advertise in both, but, if you have specific ideas of what the USCF should do, we could discuss that as well. We should all be in this together, for the benefit of players and the USCF alike. Keep in mind that once we increase attendance at our events, then we will need higher-level TDs and, of course, the certification of those TDs will “grow” accordingly.

I left out one very important factor that I look for in a TD: A director must the completely impartial. A problem I see sometimes is with the player/director or the director/dad the lack of impartiality. I have seen TDs who have every intention of playing the next round or whose kid is going to play, but when they look at the pairings they may see something they do not like and withdraw from the event, take a bye, or change the pairings. To me, this is totally unacceptable. If a TD (or his spouse or kid) intends to play, he or she must do so regardless of what the pairings are. It is not a good idea for a TD to use “inside” information for his or her own benefit. Nor is it a good idea for a TD to change the rules of the event for his or her benefit or for the benefit of a spouse or kid. I have seen that done also…

8

David,
I would take your observation about impartiality among directors one step further. One should never direct and play in the same event at any level, period. This removes any chance at all of being impartial in your own game and eliminates even the appearance of impropriety. Add in the common sense observation that it is not easy to both play and direct well, one is going to suffer, and chessplayers being egotists, we know which will suffer.

Several years ago I submitted an ADM making it against the rules for a national event to have a playing director. That was passed by the delegates. The next step is to make it wrong to direct and play at any level.

Many years ago I watched a Senior TD attempt to make a Insufficient Losing Chances ruling in his own game. When a master attempted to explain to him that it was incorrect, the director got increasingly angry and shoved the master!
Awhile back I was playing in a large regional event and the Chief Director was attempting to both play in the Open and direct. When his play was going to give me an unwanted bye, I complained louder and he eventually decided to only direct. It simply isn’t good to do both, even at the club level, no matter what the rationalization is.

Michael Atkins

9

While I sympathize with your point, that’s a pretty harsh rule for some little club tournament with a dozen players. An absolute ban of the kind you suggest might mean that a lot of those tournaments simply wouldn’t be held. I think a better approach would be a more aggressive policing by the TDCC of TDs who abuse their position, like the ones you describe.

10

Michael,

David did not make the impartiality observation or comment – I did…to David.

I do agree with you – it is a bad idea for a director to play. Having said that, I also recognize that in some areas where there is very little chess activity, playing and directing may be the director’s only chance (to play), unless he is willing to travel. Again, I do not like it, particularly above the club tournament level. At a State or National event – never!!! (Believe it or not, I actually noticed on MSA that a director played and directed at a National event last year!) Of course, if a director does, indeed, play at a Club event (or any other event), he or she must be extremely careful, making sure that nothing improper occurs and, of course, cannot make TD-type decisions that will affect his or her game!

– Franc

11

I don’t know about banning TDs from playing in events totally. I have always found it useful for the TD to also have experience as a player. Maybe a TD should not play in an event they are directing, but the TD can easily be used as a house player. I have done this many times, much to the detriment of my rating. I do recall actually playing in a number of local club events. I had an advantage in that I could give 1 player bad pairings [i.e. 3 blacks] without having to worry about a complaint, as that player would be me. Would having the TD be partial against themselve be OK in the opinion of others?

For the lower level of TD certification is it still possible to take a closed book test at a National Tournament, and waive some or all of the requirements? This was an option 10-20 years ago.

Larry S. Cohen

12

Ok, point taken. How about tournaments that reach the level of Class B or 50 player tournaments? Some club events might be tiny and some club events, like ones at Marshall, Mechanics and other large clubs could be 50-100 players. The argument given by the TD at the regional event was that the area didn’t have many TDs and the event might not happen. I don’t buy that. At a large regional event, and this one typically has had 100-200+ in the past, simply play or direct, don’t do both. Don’t put your integrity at risk or even subject to question by attempting to direct yourself. I think the rulebook has long said that directors are discouraged from directing and playing in events above the club level. Perhaps changing from “discouraged” to “are to refrain” or “should not” would help.

Mike

13

Agreed. I would suggest wording something like “… except in extraordinary circumstances” and “… may result in a review of the TD’s performance by the TDCC.”

14

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I am one of the few individuals running chess tournaments in my area. I started them so there would be more chess and so that I could play. If there was a total ban on it, then I simply wouldn’t run the tournaments. I usually have between 20 and 30 in my open sections, and sometimes an additional 18-20 in my U1200 section.

I do work very hard to make sure there are no problems with my games. There is usually another club or local TD present, and they are assigned to make rulings on my games, if necessary. I would also have no problem calling a special referree. In addition, when I am running my separate U1200 or U1000 section, then I take byes during that time. We are also talking relatively small EF and prizes, so the tempers really don’t get that heated.

15

In the '90s I played for a round as a house-player in a monetary-prize event I was one of the directors of (I was not the chief) and at another tournament when I was the chief I had my assistant director play a round as a house player, but I’ve never actually entered such a tournament when I was directing. However, I do both play and direct in 4-5 USCF-rated club events every year (no entry fee, I work for free and the only prize is a trophy), and they have occasionally exceeded 30 players. Fortunately the club now has a Senior TD available in the event that a ruling does need to be made about my game, previously had a higher-rated ANTD available, and before that had a slightly lower-rated NTD available. Since getting married and having a child, the club events have comprised the great majority of events I’ve played in (I’ve directed as many as 16 Saturday or weekend events in a year and thus find it difficult to schedule additional weekends to actually play). Prohibiting a director from playing would mean that I would sometimes go multiple years without a rated game (it is extremely difficult to get an unpaid director to drive on a weeknight to direct a tournament that he is prohibited from playing in, and realize that some of the tournaments run for six or more weeks - one night per week).

Using a pairing program helps take away the suspicion that you are manipulating the pairings to your benefit (usually unfounded, but I’ve heard of a case or two where it might be justified). Make sure you know how to use such a program, and make sure you let people know when you plan on changing the settings in the event you do so in the middle of the event (I like coding family members as a club having the family name as a code, and setting the program to avoid club pairings for the first third of the tournament - thus avoiding having a high-rated family member play a low-rated one in the early rounds while still allowing a pair of high-rated family members to play in the later rounds when such a pairing might finally be the normal one).

A number of clubs are small enough that there is only one director, and the options are to either have a playing director, require a non-playing director and risk having significantly fewer tournaments, or hire a director from outside of the club and have a significantly higher entry fee.

I’m one of the higher rated players in the club and have won some of the tournaments both before and since directing them. The various directors in the club have often included the players that would be in the running to win a tournament. Prohibiting a director from playing in our club tournaments would raise some question as to whether or not the tournament winner was truly the best player at that time (as opposed to benefiting from a rule that kept out a strong competitor). Such a prohibition would also be a disincentive for a comparatively high-rated player to start directing in the first place.

16 
  David,

Since the Fischer era turnout for tournaments has declined in my state; I suggest that the 50 player requirement for Category C be lowered to 35. This is a lower, not an easier experience requirement. And, yes, we need harder testing so we develop and train better TDs. We need better TDs available NOW since this will help provide better tournaments which should help increase attendance.
Bob

17

I frequently use my wife as a house player. I hate to have an odd number, and she helps me prevent that. I never use her to manipulate the pairings, though, and if a spectator is interested in being a house player, then I’ll use him instead. On very rare occasions, I’ve been a house player in my events, but I’ll only do that when the stakes are low. It’s not fair to my opponent to be distracted by the other issues of directing. Fortunately, there have always been enough other TDs around that I’ve been able to play in tournaments that I haven’t organized.

Alex Relyea

18

I’d disagree with this. I think that there are many tournaments that wouldn’t happen if the TD couldn’t play. I do think that the TD should have an assistant to make rulings on his own games. In no case should a TD be making rulings on his own games.

Alex Relyea

19

If the requirement for a Category C is lowered from 50 participants to 35, of course that would make it easier to attain that requirement! If that was not the case, then someone else could argue to lower it 15 more, to 20. Why not to 10 for very remote areas, ah?

Harder testing? I think that the tests developed by the TDCC are challenging yet fair. But, if you would like a different format or more challenging questions, I am sure they will welcome your specific suggestions.

Training better TDs? I think that becoming a better TD is a matter of personal choice. We become better TDs because we want to be better TDs. At most events, TDs are on their own, and particularly, it seems, where you are. I have mentored many TDs – some want to become better TDs and apply what they are being taught, others just continue doing things the same old way! That is the way it is with anything in life!

I am not trying to be critical, I am just not as willing to put most of the burden of developing better TDs on the USCF. Yes, they have the responsibility to define experience requirements and develop testing methods, and they have done so. Those requirements are reviewed and changed as necessary (see uschess.org/tds/new2008tdcer … nrules.pdf). They also have the responsibility to oversee the performance of directors, and for that, as we know, they have the TDCC. The eyes and ears of that organization, however, are the players and other TDs out in the field. They cannot send representatives to the events – it is up to participants at events to raise issues to the TDCC whenever they feel TDs are not performing their duties properly. See other threads in this Forums section, e.g., Rule 23C…

And, again, if you do not have bigger events in your area, a higher-level TD is not going to solve the problem (nor needed). The problem will be solved with more involvement in organizing events. If a Local TD organizes an event that draws 130 participants, a couple other Club or Local TDs can help! He or she can be listed as the Chief TD and I doubt very much that the USCF will hold that against the TD (for exceeding the 120-player limit). If they encounter problems they cannot solve, they can call someone who is qualified! They will learn from that experience and, along the way, will “punch those tickets” for Senior TD!

– Franc

20

Thank you to all for the great discussion and commentary. Last weekend I had the good fortune to work with 2 NTDs as a TD. Both individuals are very experienced and people I have watched, and respected, as TDs for quite some time. I asked them if I could volunteer to help them at any of their upcoming tournaments. What a great learning experience! I learned first hand what some of my weaknesses were while still having their experienced leadership there to ask questions of. Here is an example: I found that I was book smart on prize allocation but practically had a ways to go yet. In reviewing the rulebook I found that I could work through the rulebook examples quite well but it was a different endeavor to do so after the tournament with anxious players hovering near and anxious to leave. This is an area I need to improve on. I also used a new (for me) pairings program (SwissSys). I obtained some great ideas on some of the smaller items that improve the professionalism of a tournament.

I feel that Franc’s comments on a TD being completely impartial in rulings, pairing etc. is the cornerstone of the best TDs I have worked with and observed. Most of my experience with larger tournaments have involved National Scholastics. Franc, I have been at many of the tournaments that you have run and these events are very well done. I have also been to the National Open, and miscellaneous tournaments here in the Midwest. My experiences with TDs at these events have been very positive.

At present I do not have an opinion on playing TDs as I do not have a basis of experience to base an opinion on.

I hope to meet many of you in the coming years.

Dave