I will be running the Oregon Class Championships on November 6-7, oregonchessfed.org/wp-conte … -Flyer.pdf. One thing I didn’t think about it what sections unrated players should be allowed to play in. I see the 2021 US Class Championships allowed unrated players to play in any section, except the Master and Expert sections, with a 50% prize limitation. What would you recommend we do for the Oregon Class Championships?
I’d recommend a separate unrated class.
Alex Relyea
I doubt we will have enough unrated players to do that.
Does this event have any history that could used to help predict possible turnout?
I have never run a tournament other than a beginner level event where enough unrated players entered that a separate class for them would have been feasible. I think it unlikely you’ll get more than a couple. What the US Class did, or some variation on that theme seems best.
This sounds upside down to me. The problem occurs when you allow unrateds in the lower sections. Then an unknown GM from an obscure country with no chess ratings could enter the D section and run away with the top prize in that section.
I suppose, though, that unrateds in the higher sections could be a problem too. Perhaps masters would like to play against other strong players, and not have to waste their time with beginners.
Unrated players in the lower sections should not be allowed to win prizes at all – unless there is a separate unrated prize in each section.
So maybe you could have a separate, modest, unrated prize in each section. If there are prizes for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in a section, that section could also have an unrated prize at, say, 5% or 10% of the amount for 3rd. Unrateds would be eligible only for the unrated prize.
Chances are some sections would end up with no unrated players, so you wouldn’t have to pay out those prizes.
Also, you could have a clause in your TLA to the effect that “the TD reserves the right to place unrated players in a different section than requested”.
If a player has an unofficial rating – e.g. his first tournament was too recent to be in a monthly supplement yet – you could go by that rating. In that case you could enter that rating, rather than “unrated”, into the pairing software so that it would appear on the wall charts at the tournament. Fewer eyebrows would be raised that way.
Bill Smythe
I just got another idea. You could have just a single unrated prize for the whole tournament, instead of one in each section.
The unrated prize would go to the unrated player who defeated the highest-rated opponent. That would discourage “unrated sandbagging” – entering a low section to try to win money.
Unrateds would be eligible only for this single unrated prize.
Bill Smythe
I recently ran the Oregon Open which had a lot of unrated players, uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?202109067852.0. I’m assuming this was mainly due to their not having been many OTB tournaments over the last year and a half and due to the influx of new players due to people getting into the game due to online play and the Queen’s Gambit.
One interesting thing to note is that the tournament was held over three days and had a blitz side event on the second day. Had there been any unrated players who played in both the blitz and the main tournament, the initial rating they got from the blitz would have been used to initialize their regular rating from the main tournament! This is assuming the blitz is listed with the correct section date, which often doesn’t happen when a blitz side event is submitted in the same rating report as the main tournament that spans multiple days. Perhaps my idea of having the validation program come up with a warning if a blitz event is listed as being over multiple days would be a good idea to implement since this can effect regular ratings now.
This is what I did for the Oregon Open (although I despise the wall chart screen in SwissSys for various reasons and use the standings screen instead). I also used US Chess online regular ratings for any player who had no US Chess OTB regular rating but had a US Chess online regular rating. Both of these things worked out well.
FWIW, the Missouri State Championship, which was limited to 40 players and drew 39, had five unrated players. I’ve seen many tournaments with more unrateds than usual.
Especially in these times in which by and large the ONLY meaningful chess (for the most part) has been online competition throughout our federation, and there are a HUGE number of new USCF players who while they may
have GREAT experience and PLENTY of tournaments online, are unrated OTB, a wise approach may be to allow those with online ratings to use these ratings for sectional and pairing purposes in your event.
Consider that as a matter of fact, that the online ratings for those new to OTB are being used as a BASE POINT anyhow for he new OTB ratings, thus De Facto, USCF is accepting online ratings for OTB participation. Which is
an extremely good practice to help many in returning to OTB!!
My thoughts as one of the organizers very involved in this transition,
Rob Jones
Senior TD/Organizer