What does it mean when a tournament is characterized as a Tornado? Anything special about it?
nope.
Moderator Mode: Off
I believe there is a special format that was commonly known as a Tornado type of tournament. I think it might be something like G/60 or so with 4 rounds in a day. Someone can give the exact details.
When I first started playing chess in the late 1980’s I was introduced to the Tornado. It consisted of 4 rounds in the same day. The time control back then was 40/80 and 15/30. I recall at least a few games adjourned each tournament due to time issues. I also recall not having most of these tournaments end until well after 10:00 pm. And that was with a first round time of 9:00 am.
The veteran players that introduced me to chess and tournaments said they were just called Tornadoes because of the 4 rounds in a day. They also mentioned that you felt as if you had lived through a Tornado when it was over.
From what I can tell, tornado is just a term for a single day event.
The word “tornado” refers to a tournament where multiple games are played in a single day at a fairly fast time control. I haven’t seen the term used much in recent years.
From “Guide to Tournament Chess” by William Lombardy and David Daniels (1978):
So, in other words, the vast majority of events I play – four-round Saturday tourneys with a time control of G/45 or G/60 – are “tornadoes” that simply haven’t been called that?
That’s kind of anticlimactic. I thought there might actually be a distinction.
It used to be a one day tournament with a time control of 40/60.
Late 1980s: “fast”: four rounds of 40/80 15/30, adjournments.
2011: 4 Rated Games Tonight!, G/30, regular rated.
Scholastic 5 rounds, Game/30 start at 9am and award trophies in K-1 by 2pm
Even before that, it was a one day event (4 rounds) with a time control of 30/60, the fastest allowable at the time. I believe the name “tornado” was invented by one of the first proponents of this format, Garrett Scott of Bloomington, Illinois.
As soon as the fastest allowable control was changed from 30/60 to 40/60, these tornados immediately increased their speed to go along. With each succeeding increase in the fastest allowable speed, the tornados kept following suit.
Obviously, yesterday’s “tornados” are today’s average tournaments.
Bill Smythe
I played in some “tornado” tournaments in the early 1970’s. The first such events, according to K. Harkness, occurred in Minnesota. The key was the 60 minute time limit, though the moves you might have to play in that time varied. The normal time control was 30/60, 15/30 with all subsequent time controls at 15/30. IIRC, anything under one minute per move or under 30 minutes for the game was not rateable. Game 30 did not become popular until the 1980’s. Since this was an era of no time delay or digital clocks, time management was an important a skill. Clock bashing was normal.
So to fit the traditional definition of a “tornado” today, a tournament would have to be a quick-rated tournament at, like, G/10?
Moderator Mode: Off
From what I recall hearing, this explanation seems to be the most accurate. This all was before delay features were even a glimmer in Fischer’s eyes.
I distinctly remember someone telling me of the 60 minute time control being the original Tornado. I also remember that adjournments were common, very. So with the 30/60, 15/30 continuing, that would fit it all nicely.
With the delay feature, it does add time to the total game time and does eliminate adjournments. Even so, the games and tournaments are ending much faster now than in those days. Our current one day, weekend events are still starting at 9:00 am but now are ending well before 9:00 pm, compared to the late nights I remember when I first started. I do remember being at a tournament until after midnight one time.
Let’s see, a G/80, 5 sec delay. will last no more than 2 hours and 50 minutes in a 60 move game. That same 60 move game would take 4 hours in the original Tornado time controls listed above. Wow that’s 1 hour and 10 minutes that we have cut off playing time, per game at that rate.
As I recall, most of the tornado games rarely went beyond move 45. Therefore, they fit within a 3 hour time frame. TD’s had to scramble to have pairings done on time and fit within the 10 am -1 pm - 4 pm - 7 pm rounds format. Often the last round did not start until 8 pm or a little later. If any game was adjourned, the games had to be completed before round four. Another big pain was readjusting the clocks accurately after the first time control.
If a TD was a strong player, he would walk around the room and “anticipate” results, speeding up the pairing process. Players were always surprised when the last game of a round would be finished and the TD was already posting pairings for the next round. During rounds it was a good idea to frequently update the crosstables as games finished. This speeded up the process and let the players know what was going on. Everyone crowded around the crosstables and tried to predict pairings or prize chances. Today crosstables come out late or not until a later round. TDs in those days had to stay on top of things, be visible, and not get behind in their paperwork. Knowing how to make fast, accurate pairings for 40+ players was almost an art.
I’m a firm believer, to this day, in keeping wallcharts updated as each game finishes. This is true whether the time control is G/60 or 40/120. Computer-generated crosstables can be updated by hand, game by game. Then, as soon as next round’s pairings go up, new computer-generated crosstables can be printed, showing next round’s pairings but (of course) not next round’s results. And this cycle continues to the end of the tournament.
In Swis-Sys language (at least the older versions), if the charts are updated by hand, it is necessary only to post the A charts, not the C charts. A charts with handwritten results are essentially C charts, anyway.
What ever happened to the bygone concept of TDs doing things for the players?
Bill Smythe
I always liked to update the wall charts. It was my best opportunity to “look ahead” and start thinking about pairings. It also gave me more contact with the players and spectators who crowded the wall chart area in order to do a little PR. By being visible and accessible, many problems were nipped in the bud. One of the guys who started the one day tornados in our area gave me a good piece of advice: Always shake the hand and thank everyone who has come to a tournament, especially those who leave early. When players feel good about their tournament experience, they almost always come back.
The best reason to update the wall charts is to keep the players informed. Players, too, like to “look ahead” and guess their pairings (even though their guesses are usually wrong). This is especially true near the end of the round, when most games have finished.
When all games have finished, but next round’s pairings are not yet posted, as a player I always feel a little disappointed in the TD staff if the wall charts contain no results for the round just finished.
Bill Smythe
I agree. By having the wall charts updated you also have a little redundancy in making sure all of the results marked on the pairing sheets are correct. The players are usually swift to note discrepancies in scores and posted results.
And even scholastics had wallcharts.