The Washington State Championship is played over 5-days and two weekends which I personally do not like since the tournament takes place in the Seattle are and I live 3 hours away from the Seattle area and I do not want to drive back and forth from Seattle two weekends in a row and pay for a hotel for two weekends for that many days.
Do you think a Friday night round followed by two rounds on Saturday and two on Sunday would work?
Not sure if half point byes would be allowed or not. If I do the format with one round on Friday night, maybe it would be good to allow a half point by for the Friday night round.
Micah neglects to mention that the reason the WA State Championship is held over 5 days is because it is a FIDE rated 10 player round robin. Before it became FIDE rated, it was still over 2 weekends as an 8 player round robin. I believe that is also the way Oregon does their state championship. I love having a strong round robin state championship. In Washington it is so popular they have two more concurrent round robins. That makes it a very special experience. I was fortunate enough to play in the second tier round robin one year, and even though I finished next to last I cherish the experience. We have had players from Spokane, which is twice as far from Seattle as Portland, qualify and play in these events.
Totally agree that a bye option for Friday night is essential if he goes to the 1-2-2 format if he wants people who work or travel to play.
Given how difficult it is to schedule five rounds at the time control that you want, you should probably put some effort into figuring out just how many invitees there would likely be. Then assume that you get maybe 50-60% of them to play. If you end up with no more than mid 20’s (which sounds like what you would get), then four rounds should be enough—not only would you be very unlikely to have multiple perfect scores, you might not even have one.
You are assuming some draws. To see just how unlikely that might be you could look at the National HS with various sections of different strength players.
In the National HS:
Championship 264 players → one 6-0 (no 7-0). At the start, three 7-0 were possible.
U1900 145 players → two 5.5-0.5 (no 6-0 and only one 6.5-0.5). Two 7-0 were possible.
U1600 298 players → one 7-0. Three 7-0 were possible.
U1200 357 players → one 6-0 (no 7-0). Three 7-0 were possible.
U800 257 players → two 6-0 (no 7-0). Three 7-0 were possible.
Unr 105 players → one 6-0 (no 7-0). One 7-0 was possible.
Grand total of one 7-0 when 15 were possible (though only 12 would have been likely if all games had been decisive).
If you want a broader range of ratings in a section then look at the K-12 school grade with 1730 players in 13 sections (all school grade based and none rating based). There were two at 7-0 (4th and 2nd grade) and 11 made it to 6-0 (only two in the same section) when it would have been possible for there to be 35 at 6-0 (closer to 26 was more likely if you assume no draws). Five sections would each have had a very legitimate chance of two 7-0 players if no draws occurred.
Since it’s going to be effectively an A and up tournament, I’m assuming a lot of draws. I’ve seen more than a few 5 round 30ish player 1800+ sections won with 4.0.
Why is that relevant for this tournament? Wouldn’t coming up with a format that would be convenient for your club members or locals (who will be the vast majority of your entrants) make the most sense?
I have disdain for the two weekend WA State Champ format even thought the majority of people who qualify for it are from the Seattle area. Therefore, I wouldn’t want to schedule a tournament over two weekends for the few out of town players. Also, having it over two weekends can hurt attendance since not everyone can commit to playing two weekends in a row.
And some people can play two Saturdays, but can’t play an entire weekend. Most of your qualifiers are coming out of one-day tournaments, not full weekend tournaments. In the end, it’s the players that will decide the format…by voting with their feet. I’m not saying which I think would work better, but to reject a perfectly reasonable possibility because of a personal dislike for the format of a dramatically different tournament is not how a good organizer would approach this.
Since you brought it up, how else would you run a ten player RR tournament drawing players from across an entire state if you don’t use two weekends?
A critical mistake is made by organizers who consider only their own preferences when organizing an event. When the whole setup is designed for the benefit of one person, the TD/organizer, he should not be real surprised when attendance is low and he loses money. I have seen a couple of rookie organizers do this, at considerable cost to themselves and damage to their club’s reputation. It is clear other methods have worked before and the players were satisfied. Showing “disdain” for those other events is a poor way of getting others to accept your setup. Considering the needs and preferences of the players is basic common sense.
I will give you an example of a bad mistake. A friend of mine decided to organize a two day Grand Prix tournament on a particular weekend in May, the Mother’s Day weekend. I told him it was a bad idea, that he would lose money. Husbands are not going to ditch their wives to play chess on that weekend. Few kids would play. He would have a hard time finding experienced TDs to run it for him. I suggested he pick another weekend or if that wasn’t possible, hold only a one day event on Saturday. He was stubborn. He said that was the only weekend he had off to do it. Besides, he said, his mother had passed away and a lot of players no longer had mothers. He thought older players would come to the event. He would direct it himself. Seven players ultimately registered for the event. He lost over a thousand dollars of guaranteed prize money. He made his club look foolish. After the event he blamed the players in the area for not coming and the club for not publicizing the event adequately. The big financial loss and personal embarrassmen led him to never organize or direct another event.
Several people have offered the feedback you requested. You have “disdained” it for the most part. Why should anyone offer you free advice that we usually get paid for when we organize events? Good luck!
Then it is a good thing you have no influence over the way the WCF and OCF run their state championships. Their leaders long ago recognized the value of top competition, and that’s why these events have been primarily master-only events in the championship sections. It’s why WA had so many FIDE rated players long before others did.
However, what you are proposing is not a state championship event, so I don’t criticize you for not wanting to go to two weekends. Nevertheless, you will need to gauge the number of likely entrants, the playing conditions preferred by the likely players (not by yourself) and the desired prestige level. Then select the time control, number of rounds and time schedule most likely to maximize the goals you have for the tournament. If you want prestige you have to have a slow enough time control. If you have a lot of entrants you need more rounds. Those two facts may not allow a two day event. Moreover, at prestigious events people want more than a 15 minute meal break.
Your unpaid consultants have given you their best input. Now use your best judgment. Good luck.
I would sure love to see some seminars, perhaps coinciding with the World Open or US Open, on organizing tournaments. Multi-day tournaments usually require arrangements with a hotel, which will also be the playing venue. It is, to me anyway, a rather daunting prospect. There are certainly some caveats that experienced organizers have learned that would be good to pass on so others do not have to learn the hard (and expensive) way.
I’m not considering only my own preferences. I am thinking of the out-of-town players and also local players who can’t play a tournament over two consecutive weekends.
