I have a hypothetical question:
Assume
Can the games between USCF members be submitted for USCF rating (with appropiate fee of course) ? (assume the players are in consent).
No, see page 260 of the rulebook which says in part:
Thus the entire tournament would have to be USCF rated, which means that all of the players would have to be USCF members, pay for a length-of-tournament membership (or participation fee) or qualify for a membership exemption (of which there are several types.)
This is true for events regardless of where they are held. There have been some concerns and a few complaints that some TD are running events but only submitting games between USCF members for rating. This would be a direct violation of USCF rating rules and if verified could subject the TD and the sponsoring affiliate to sanctions.
The exception to this rule (in the USCF there seems to be an exception to EVERY rule) is that some players in FIDE events which are not also USCF rated may have their USCF ratings adjusted for their performance in that FIDE event. (However, the entire event is NOT being USCF rated, only USCF members eligible for an adjustment will have their ratings adjusted.)
This has resulted in some controversy and frustration over just exactly which players should have their ratings adjusted and by how much.
I don’t see a problem with this if certain guidelines are followed.
We had a High School league that was not rated, but if two uscf players ‘happened’ to be playing each other, they could ask that their games be rated.
I know in HS, they were rated as match play since it didn’t happen a lot that the circumstances were met.
So, I don’t know whether now they’d rate it as match play or as a tournament? (like an extra rated games section?)
EDIT
I see Mike posted while I was writing this up. What do you think if they are submitted as match play, Mike?
I’ve expanded upon my earlier post, you might want to go back and read it.
The problem is that ANY practice which permits some games in an event to be rated while others in that same event are not rated could be used to manipulate the ratings system.
We have more than enough suspicious-looking events as it is, I hope we don’t try to allow more of them by letting TDs or players cherry-pick which games they want rated.
That is disappointing.
However, isn’t it true (in the scenario I described) that there is cherry-picking of a sort in that those games between USCF member are not being rated ?
Perhaps an exception can be made as these games would played “on foreign soil”. The last time I looked there were only 3 foreign affiliates.
The Delegates or the Executive Board would have to change the rules to permit such an exception. As a Delegate, I would likely vote against it, there’s too many people trying to manipulate their ratings today, we don’t need to legitimize more ways to do that.
How is this situation different from a TD who simply lets non-members play in a U.S. tournament? If you wanted the event USCF-rated, you could simply have collected memberships (or tournament memberships) from all the players.
The situation is different in that all the players in the tourney will be CFC members (ie members of the national federation where the tournament is being held). Not all these members are, or wish to be USCF members.
Beyond the objections based stated (which appear to be rule based, not logic based), what is the beef ?
If players A and B in said tournament are USCF members and they happen to play each other, what is the objection based on logic, that this game should not be USCF rated (given the assumptions I outlined in the original post) ?
Selective rating of games would a) make it very easy to cheat and “rig” ratings, and b) reduce the number of USCF members (you don’t have to be a member to play, only to have your games rated). One example of the former: did he play his membership before or after he won his first two rounds? As for the latter: not all the players in a USCF tournament “wish to” pay their dues, but that’s not the determining factor. I just don’t see the relevance of the players being CFC members. There is simply no connection between the organizations.
If the tournament director is certified and all procedures followed, there seems to be no real problem in rating the games. Without proof, why is there an assumption in some of the posts that the players and TD are trying to rig the rating system. It would be a rather expensive and silly way just to gain a few points.
Is there some bias against the CFC? I have played in several of their tournaments, all run with the increment time control. The tournaments were run extremely well, on time, and with virtually no problems. I can’t say the same for many large US events. The Canadians come down hard on cheating and are sticklers for making sure all procedures are followed.
Oh, and by the way, why are we turning away money, given the financial state the USCF is in?
The problem is that this seems to be a backdoor way into getting rid of the rule that all players have to be USCF members to play in a given tournament.
Say you have 40 players and 2 of them aren’t USCF members. It isn’t fair that the players that came to play rated games don’t get a rated game when they play them. That isn’t what they came for.
This situation basically reverses the issue where you have 40 players and say two of them are USCF. They happen to meet and want to have their game rated.
On the surface it does seem odd that those same two players could get together and play a match and have it rated. I wonder how the USCF would answer that? We have a match and by the way we are going to use the results of that match for something else (a CFA tournament for example)
But anyway the fear from the USCF isn’t that they are turning away money etc but that by following the procedure that you are asking for that much more money would be lost.
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you’re always afraid
Step outta line, the men come, and take you away
TMAGCHESSPGN above has stated some of my intended rebuttals.
What is reason of your fear of the rigging of ratings ? These players in 99% of cases, if not more will be Canadians, ineligible for any US championships. Sandbagging effects are ruled out in any case , as most tournaments use the higher of the USCF or CFC ratings. (It actually works the other way; in my proposal the Canadian USCF member’s USCF rating gets more in line with his true strength.)
The USCF (as stated in another thread) rates SOME USCF players performances in foreign FIDE events, where there is likely to be very few USCF members and it is unlikely that a USCF affiliate is involved !
To answer Hillery’s statement - there is no reduction of membership, if anything, it is an increase. The rule for US based tournaments would be the same as now -all or nothing.
By the way, look at this uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php … 0-12727950