I came up with an idea for a new tournament to run at my club, the “PCC Tournament of Champions” and wanted to get feedback from folks here.
Tournament Format: The PCC Tournament of Champions is a prestigious, invitational event that will occur annually. The inaugural Tournament of Champions will take place on a Saturday and Sunday in June 2017. The tournament will be a 5-round Swiss in one section. The time control will be G/90;inc30 with the rounds scheduled for 10am, 2:15pm, and 6:30pm on the Saturday and 11am and 3:15pm on the Sunday. The tournament will be US Chess rated (US Chess membership required). There will be a $50 entry fee with 80% given back as prizes. Prize allocation: 1st-50%, 2nd-30%, 3rd-20%.
Qualification: The winner or co-winners of the top section of every rated tournament run or sponsored by the PCC (except quick-only and blitz events) qualify for the PCC Tournament of Champions (regardless of where they live). The qualification period for the 2017 Tournament of Champions runs from the beginning of June 2016 to the end of May 2017. The list of qualifiers currently includes the following (any other dual or regular rated tournament the PCC decides to run or sponsor will be added):
PCC Tuesday Quads
PCC Quad 45
PCC Game in 60
2016 Portland Summer Open
2016 Oregon Open
2016 Portland Fall Open
2016 Portland Chess Club Championship
2016 Portland Winter Open
2017 Gresham Open
2017 Portland Spring Open
2017 Harmon Memorial
2017 Rose City Sectionals
One aspect I’m still debating is if there is a tie for first at the Tournament of Champions, should there be a playoff to determine the winner (and if so, what format would you recommend?)
There would be a fifteen minute break and most games do not go 60 moves. If a game does go around 4 hours or more, we will grant those players some extra time off, as is the normal procedure at the PCC.
Increment is fine for one round per day events, but for two round per day events you need a lot of time between the rounds because the round time is theoretically unlimited. Sooner or later some pairing is going to go 150 moves or more, and this will wreak havoc with your schedule. You used to be able to handle this with adjournments, but computers have pretty well killed that idea. For a tournament where you want to have three rounds in one day I strongly recommend using delay instead of increment.
How do you pair the next round if a game goes on four hours or more? (This is a Swiss, not quads). This is supposed to be a prestigious tournament. You’re scheduling it for seat-of-the-pants directing.
Do you actually need five rounds? How many people would qualify? While you might have quite a few qualifying events, you probably also have several people that have won more than one.
I actually have a little experience with a similar time control and schedule. The Bunratty Chess Festival plays six rounds over three days at G/90+15, with three rounds on the middle Saturday. That is one brutal day of chess. As much as I love southern Ireland, I wouldn’t play that tournament if it affected any rating I care about.
If the event is prestigious, then you might want to consider spreading it our over two weekends. Since you are having a long time control and using increment time, have the games on Friday at 7 pm, Saturday 2 pm or 3 pm, and Sunday at the same time as Saturday’s round. This would allow you to run a 5 or 6 round tournament, with maximum comfort for the players, and have an award ceremony or awards dinner after the last round. For example, our Metropolitan Pittsburgh Championship used to be run over three Saturdays in January. It was the tournament to play in as it gave you plenty of time to prepare for games. From what you have given, it looks like you might have more than 32 eligible players, so a 6 round tournament is advisable.
What is the EF and prize fund for the Pittsburgh tournament? An “invitation” to pay a $50 EF with zero chance to win money (which an 1800-1900 would have in a tournament with probably several masters) may not be looked at favorably by some.
The issue may not be increment vs delay, but rather, 30 seconds vs 5 seconds.
You could stick with increment, but make it faster, such as 5 seconds, 10 seconds, or 15 seconds.
Sevan (bless his soul) frequently ran 4-round 1-day events at his club, at G/60 inc/30. The rounds were at 10:00-1:00-4:00-7:00. Occasionally one or two games were allowed a late start because of a long game, but for the most part the rounds started on time.
If it does go more than four hours then the issue is not just the time off for the two players involved. There is also the issue of all of the other players who will have to wait until after that game is finished before the next round can even be paired. Unless you plan on pairing the following round while games are still going on in the current round (and I’d suggest against that) you run a significant risk of having your schedule slip. Does normal PCC procedure include the expectation that rounds can slip and the schedule will shift to ASAP for the rest of the day?
I do a lot of scholastics on an ASAP schedule, but significant tournaments like a state or national scholastic should have scheduled round times that make things easier to handle for both parents and kids. It sounds like you want this to be a significant tournament, so a realistic schedule should be drawn up.
@Tom Doan
The Metropolitan Pittsburgh Ch. used to be held over 3 Saturdays in January, with two games per day. Rounds were at 10 am and 4pm at 50/120, 25/60 with adjournments if necessary, IIRC. The event was open to any resident of Allegheny County (where Pittsburgh is) and all contiguous counties. The entry fee was around $15; the payout around 80% of entry fees. In the late 70’s, it was still attracting over 80 entries. Over time it has devolved into a 3 round tournament at Game 90, d5 with only a couple of dozen attending. The fear of inclement weather, and not being able to find people to run it for three Saturdays, changed the event from a prestigious event that most of the top players attended to an ordinary one day event. From what I have read, it appears Micah is trying to set up a final event based on many qualification tournaments, not just an invitational event. Kudoes to him for asking how others have set up their events.
In any event that is run, there should be enough time between rounds so that the players can get something to eat and rest. At minimum the players should have a half hour, not just 15 minutes. If the rounds are too close together, there will always be one or more games that are very long, leading to delays of the next round. My preference is that all players start at the same time and not have people who have been given extra time coming in and dumping their pieces on the table disturbing the rest of the players. To avoid that, we also prefer to have sets and boards provided to minimize the noise at the start of the round. In a prestigious event, the rounds should never start late. Never. It reflects badly on the organization and the TD if that happens. There should only be two rounds per day, maximum. Score sheets should be placed at each board before the round. Post rules or have an information sheet for each of the players. That is better than making the same announcement every round about cell phones, time control, round times, etc. If you can, have free coffee, tea, and some snacks on hand for the players. They will appreciate it and come back for future events. I have seen this work for many clubs’ tournaments. If you cannot do it for all events, do it at least for one tournament to make it special and stand out among all other tournaments so that more will try to qualify for it. These little amenities do not cost much, but are remembered and talked about among the players.
If you’re going to use increment, use G/75;inc30. Keep the same round times so people can eat, take a short walk, or prepare for the next game. Also easier on the TD. 3rd and 5th rounds can start earlier by an agreement.
I’m a slow player. G/90 is preferred but not practicable in many cases. G/60 I start in time trouble. G/75 is the best compromise.
$15 is probably dated, but $20-$25 EF sounds like it would be more reasonable. $50 has a built-in tax to transfer to the local masters. Winning the right to pay a $50 EF sounds a lot like the trips to Cancun that my fax machine tells me I’ve “won”.
I don’t think anyone has any problem with Micah asking for advice. But does he read it for any purpose other than making snippy replies? An occasional “thank you” (even “thanks, but I already thought of that”) would go a long way.
