Tournament Guide

All Things Chess
1

Greetings,

In my potential capacity as a subject matter expert for the local military base, I plan on creating a basic reference guide for the recreation managers to use for the mandated activity of chess to help them in their efforts to provide more chess for the Marines.

I am trying to work out a content guide on what should be in there to guide my efforts. My basic question is how can I reference material in the USCF rulebook without overstepping any copyright boundaries. I intend to recommend the purchase of them so they can be referenced. But for club and informal tournaments, the USCF rulebook is too much for them to be wading through. So I am just needing a general reference to basic rules and situations that might apply as an introduction before these Marines eventually encounter USCF tournaments.

Contents

  1. Introduction to Marine Corps Chess
  2. Background about United States Chess
  3. Introduction to InterService Chess
  4. Introduction to Armed Forces Open
  5. Resources for chess
  6. Introduction to tournament play
  7. Basic setup for 4 person quad
    :sunglasses: Basic explanation of round robin
  8. Basic explanation of swiss
  9. Intro to some basic USCF rules
  10. How to write notation
  11. Using the clock
  12. Special moves
  13. Three ways to draw

This is some of what I have worked out that needs to be included. Any suggestions of what else to provide for a non chess playing director to run small tournaments?

Thanks for taking a look and any positive comments, suggestions, and criticisms that will be made.

Best regards,
Sara Walsh

2

I would suggest you start by looking at the files available on the USCF website under ‘Activities & Interests’ → Forms. The Scholastic Chess Guide is a bit dated and oriented more towards kids, but there may be a lot of good material there for you as well.

3

Which three ways to draw were you thinking of?

Agreement
Stalemate
Three-fold repetition
50-move rule
Insufficient losing chances in sudden death (no delay clock)
Insufficient material to continue
Insufficent material to mate when the opponent flags

4

Let met put in a shameless plug for the Metrowest Chess Club web site. We have some documents that may be useful to you and that you’re welcome to use.

Just this month, we published a Tournament Rules For New Players brochure. We specifically kept the club-specific information to a minimum, and we made clear what was MCC-specific so that the brochure would be useful to a wider audience.

We also have an explanation of How to Record Moves.

Hope this helps! (I have to admit I can’t shake the image of a drill sergeant in some poor recruit’s face yelling “You WILL learn to mate with bishop and knight, private!” :smiling_imp:)

5

Ken,

Can I use the “new player” stuff from your club site? In fact you should campaign the USCF to publish the document.

Tim

6

Perhaps she meant “three possible game results”: win, lose, draw.

Or perhaps she meant “three ways to get out of check”: move, block, take.

In any case, the guide that Princess Chess is putting together sounds quite useful for new chess people, and I hope she will share an online link with us when she’s done.

It’s a challenge putting together a basic list of chess rules and tournament practice that is comprehensive enough, yet quick and easy to read and use.

7

Is ‘offering a draw’ a way to get out of check? :slight_smile:

8

I’ll confess I thought there were about three ways too. Unless we’re trying to turn out NTD chess lawyers :wink: I think the last three can be saved for later … much later.

Why? I guess, because you don’t need to think about them to make plans and calculations as a player, to choose your next move. There are some details that can be fairly safely offloaded to the TD.

9
  1. Not unless it’s accepted.
  2. You’re supposed to move right before or after offering the draw aren’t you? And the move will have to be one of the other ways of getting out of check.

These wonderful questions show the true value of what Sara is trying to do. A rulebook of less than 400 pages that tells you what you need to have a common-sense understanding and be a player.

10

Clearly there’s a demand for this, because I just recently produced this in anticipation of our $5 Open in February, which will be an unrated tournament open to the general public. (The bit about not using figurine pieces is specifically intended to deter one particular individual from bringing his Simpsons set. :confused: )

11

I will admit I was thinking of just the three draws that can happen on the board - repetition, 50 moves, and stalemate.

And this guide will be primarily for the non-chess playing managers who will be running the tournaments. I don’t want to overwhelm them with details that they probably won’t need. And they will have an USCF rulebook if it comes to that. The tournaments they run will typically be quads or small round robins or swisses on a weeknight.

Right now I’m just trying to decide on what to include. I know there is a ton of information on the USCF website and other resources - thanks for all links - but I would like to figure out what is absolutely necessary for them to run basic tournaments and introduce things like clock use, notation, etc. that the players won’t have run into previously.

Best regards,

Sara Walsh

12

Well, one could make a case that most of what’s in the USCF rulebook is what’s needed to run a tournament. :wink: Not to mention, if it’s rated, to need to have the rulebook on site and also TDs who are certified (and thus presumptively know the rulebook.) But even unrated, “what’s needed” in the rulebook far outweighs “what isn’t” in terms of volume, IMVHO. Which is why the Rulebook is as thick as it is. :slight_smile:

I’m not criticizing the idea or your wishing to do this — far from it! And, with a nephew who was in Iraq and a father in Korea (both part of the Green Machine,) commend any effort to bring more Chess to more of the Corps. Not to mention any effort for the alma mater of my brother-in-law, other nephew, and myself.

But as an LTD you would certainly know much of the above already. :blush:

You sound a little unsure of the scope of this. You describe this as being for directors, but the TOC contains material for people playing their first tournament. Is it for managers? Players? Both? For managers to help players? My personal recommendation would be that you have separate documents for players and managers. The manager’s document might contain references to the rulebook and where to find things in it. That way you’re not re-inventing the wheel.

Or, if a unified document, have two sections: That which all players and managers must know, and then knowledge for managers?

Suggestions: <Deleted - you already have quads / RRs in your TOC.> But describing how to run a Swiss? That’s a huge chunk of the rulebook.

How about, “What is a bye and why did I get one?”
“Recruiting players.”
“Teaching the game.” or equivalent.

For managers, basic thoughts on scheduling rounds and timing (i.e. don’t plan on four rounds of G/30 being completed in four hours.)

The more I think about it, though, it sounds like you’re trying to achieve teaching how to run a tournament… to people who don’t know how to play chess? How to make directing decisions without knowing how to play? Not saying that’s impossible - just a hard row to hoe.

Last thought for now… There has to be others who have already faced this situation (other subject matter experts on other bases? Those who’ve run the Armed Forces tournament who might know of resources?)

Anyway, good luck! I’ll post more if I think of anything else - I hoped the above helped?

13

Well the chess program is coming down from HQ. So they have to implement something. The local base has 6 recreation centers that have to provide chess (I’m mainly being brought in to provide the USCF tournaments so they can get rated to potentially play in the Inter-Service tournament - 2 Marines (out of 6 possible) only in the last two years in the tournament)). The managers already know how to run tournaments - they do so for poker and pool already. If they get more than 6 or 8 wanting to play tournaments on a weeknight, I’ll be extremely impressed.

You would think that as easily navigable as the current rulebook might be one could just hand it to them, but I have a feeling they will take one look at the thing and say I have to know all that? So I need to break it down in some form or fashion. I’m sure it will get refined as they encounter situations and ask questions.

Might have to adapt some rules for club use, for example:

Draws occur when neither player when there are no winner in a chess game. Three types of draws can occur over the board - stalemate (see page X for rules/attached glossary), 50 moves without a capture or pawn move(notation required, see page Y for rules), repetition of the position three times (see page Z for rules). Opponents can offer to end the game in a draw. Multiple offers can be seen as (insert your own word here) unless the position has drastically changed. See page ABC for rules on draw offers. Further opportunities for a draw exist when there is use of a clock - either through lack of material by one player when the other’s flag has fallen or a player can try to claim ‘insufficient losing chances.’ See page XYZ for how this claim would be handled in an USCF tournament. For local tournaments, if these endgames occur when such a claim is played, you may rule the game a draw. For any other type of material imbalance, inform the player that according to local rules they must play on to a definite resolution on the board or through a flag fall. After the game is after, you may share the USCF rulebook and how the situation would be handled in an USCF sanctioned tournament.

Definitely yes, unlike pool or poker, it would definitely be better for the person running the tournament to have played before. I am not sure entirely what will happen when people start making claims about illegal moves or wanting a draw by repetition with the managers not even knowing how the pieces move. Especially with the majority of these players never having seen a clock or a chess tournament before. Oh, not to mention never having run across en passant or the occasional weird rule that their grandparent taught them when they were young.

I’ll just have to run some chess classes I guess. Chess in the 21st Century - this isn’t your GrandDaddy’s chess. Or Tournament Chess - that obscure nether world of foreign phrases and inscrutable rules. Okay I’ll give it too - Boot Camp Chess for Managers - 6 weeks of learning all you never wanted to know about chess tournaments.

Oh what have I let myself in for. :slight_smile:

14

I think Sara is thinking more on the lines of a ‘Tournament Survival Guide’, or possibly two of them, one for players and one for TDs. (Maybe we need a third one for parents at scholastic events?)

15

Both those guides for the players are great. They look amazing and have all the basics in a good readable format. I will definitely have to do some thievery there. But that is the easy part.

Getting the non-chess playing managers to run a proper tournament such that these Marines can get ready for USCF tournaments, I think is becoming a more daunting task by the moment.

We’ll see. I get to share the vision and plans for the next several months in a meeting with them next week, so maybe I can infuse them with some enthusiasm about learning to run tournaments. :slight_smile:

16

When these Marines play… will the Knights need crewcuts?

17

The concepts of “loss” and “draw” will be difficult for Marines to accept. Semper Fi!
Good luck with your efforts to expand chess services to the military. Note the efforts by the NJ chess state org. in raising money to send sets to Iraq. Did they send instructional materials (books, software), too?

18

This is good. I would like to borrow this stuff too

19

Another thought…

You’re talking about unrated play with a goal to prepare some of them for rated play. (And, possibly, for some of the others just to enjoy the game with no other strings attached.)

One approach you might take would be: Let the players themselves know how to play the game. (Or, have resources for them to learn…) In your unrated tournaments, allow the players themselves to look up the rules in the rulebook and settle disputes themselves, if possible.

(Either USCF, or a rulebook you create yourself… As to copyrights, are the FIDE Laws of Chess copyrighted? If not - there’s your source material. Then modify that with appropriate rules eventual USCF players will need to know and take out the FIDE stuff that doesn’t apply to USCF play. And you don’t have to include ILC or other rules - let that be something for a transitional class. “OK, you’ve played, now here’s what will be different in a rated tournament…”)

In short, don’t try to make the non-playing manager a TD responsible for game decisions - just allow them to manage the system.

Rules disputes thus become the players’ responsibility to settle under the given rules. I suppose, if a manager had to get involved, have the players present which rules in the rulebook they think apply and let the manager rule based on what the players bring to them - but make the players bring the rule in question and the situation to the manager.

For tournament form, keep it short and simple with quads, with some form akin of shoot-out if you have a three player situation, or just a match if it’s two players. (The goal here wouldn’t be to protect ratings integrity, after all, just to give the Marines a chance to play in a fair environment.) And thus, your managers exist to simply say, “You play you, you play you, and then over here, you play you, and you play the winner of that game.”

If you’re timing the games, you’ll have to have a guide to using clocks, maybe?
(Or does the rec centers have simple analog timers? Doubt that, but still…)

OK, off to do other things. Like 12-steps, take what was useful and let the rest pass away. :slight_smile:

20

I’d like to vote somewhere around +20 for LaughingVulcan’s spot-on suggestions.

If the tournament is not USCF rated, I think you should make the tournament manager’s job as simple as possible. If they have a pairing program and are comfortable using it, fine. Otherwise, I would be tempted to use a random pairing Swiss. That is, for the first round, draw names randomly for pairings (first player drawn gets white). Then, for subsequent rounds, you would follow the Swiss rule of keeping score groups intact, but within the score group, you would draw names randomly.

Similarly, keep the color allocation simple. Maybe the goal could be that each player gets the opposite color he had in the previous round. If the two randomly drawn players are due different colors, you’re done. Otherwise, the first name drawn gets the due color. Sure, under this system, some poor shlub could end up with black every round, but I wouldn’t sweat it. The system is fair in that everyone has equal chances of being drawn first (and thereby getting the due color).

Simplify, simplify, simplify!