Tournament Director Errors

[ericmark]

@Brian Mottershead

@Smythe Dakota

@seki

… Seems to me that the real problem is that USCF point limits for transposition and alternation are too strict and box the TD into a corner on long tournaments. …

I think the current rule 29E5f makes it pretty clear that the 200-point limit is out the window if it would give somebody 3 of the same color in a row.

Bill Smythe

Isn’t it the 80-point rule that is out the window? Someone with two in a row of a color is in an alternation situation (for the second time) not necessarily a color equalization situation. Besides, 29E5f says that you can have 3 of the same color in a row if it is required for color equalization. (It would have to be a pretty extreme color equalization situation, such as WWBWWBBB). So the rule that 29E5f sets aside is the 80 point rule, not the 200 point rule. No? I can’t think of anything else which 29E5f does, so probably it would have been better just to state that the the 80-point rule does not apply if a player already failed to alternate on the previous round (i.e. now has two of the same color in a row.)

It clarifies that three colors in a row is

1. A very bad thing; but

2. Still not as bad—in rare circumstances—as the alternative; therefore

3. It is legal to pair a player with three straight Blacks or Whites.

This clarification is a good thing, since previous editions of the Rulebook flat-out prohibited three consecutive colors; also the rule is there in print to show to even normally placid players who might complain or appeal three straight Blacks.