It’s also worth noting that of those 5258 adult events held last year, over 90% were small enough that a Club TD could have served as the chief TD, which is nearly identical to the number of ‘small’ events in 1999.
[/quote]
I think this is part of the problem. The 5th edition of the Rulebook is very helpful with TD tips, but no exam is required. Players expect their TD to be perfect, but few are, and most know they need some training. If we want better TDs we should provide some face to face training from stronger certified TDs on a regular schedule at National events.
If there is a need in the community for TDs with higher certification levels, then there is already a demand. Demand should help to alleviate the problem of acquiring higher certification (under the current system) since opportunities exist for TDs to get the necessary experience that are required. However, if that demand is not evident in the immediate community, then any TD with aspirations to achieve a higher level of certification has to look elsewhere for opportunities to assist in larger tournaments.
On the question of TD quality, the problem exists across the board. Personally, I would like to see more emphasis placed on improving the quality of our TDs and I would support a different approach to achieving that aim. I would suggest a USCF initiative that incorporates training seminars held periodically throughout the country. Current TDs or individuals desiring to become TDs could sign up to attend these seminars which are taught by qualified Local, Senior and National TDs. Additionally, some credit could be given to the participants in their quest for higher cerification. This would be especially helpful to those TDs that are finding it difficult to achieve higher certification through no fault of their own.
I think we should prepare (in a different way) our TDs and our immediate communities for the hopeful day when tournament attendance will be greater. The current system rewards TDs that are fortunate to serve successful chess communities or are willing to assist other communities with a larger chess base. The USCF should do more to prepare all communities with their own local TDs with the certification they will need when their communities grow. Before that demand appears, have the local TDs ready with the appropriate certification level. Ideally, they should have been serving their immediate communities instead of having to seach outside their communities for adequate opportunities in larger tournaments.
Perhaps we need to change it to 10 Category C tournaments. And end it at that. Very simple and straightforward. I’ll work on some wording. Get rid of all substitutions in all levels make it simple and straightforward.
If we want experienced TDs though, we should say “keep lamenting and get one more event”.
I actually thought it was too easy to get the tournaments for Senior, but fairly hard to get the rest for ANTD. Maybe we should make it harder for the higher levels?
I think the Club and Local should be very easy as we have it now, but after that, we should make sure those TDs are quality. Maybe even put in a xx% of last year of tournaments submitted timely.
Too easy to get tournaments for Senior? Possibly in Indiana, but here in Alabama (and other smaller states) a Category C is a rare, rare occurence. Yes, we need quality TDs, but the requirements need to address this problem.
That suggests that the necessity of having a Senior (or higher TD) direct an event is also a rare, rare occurrence in Alabama.
I believe there is still the option to go to a USCF national event (or some other event where a TDCC member would be available to proctor the exam) and take the Senior exam closed-book with some/most of the experience requirements being waived.
So, if you are a Tournament Floor Chief over 400 players in your State Scholastic Team tournament, that shouldn’t count as experience credit? That is a Category T tournament. I do not think 10 Category C tournaments alone is a good idea. I do think that very clearly written requirements that are not subjective to interpretation is.
True enough, but your previous remark :
" The only step in the right direction I want to see is one that gets better qualified TDs out there.
I don’t know that this achieves that"
I agree 100% with your statement. Properly trained TDs are more important than titles. Now that Club TDs can renew rather than moving up to Local by taking an exam and having some experience, it seems to me that we are going backwards.
Most professions and technical positions require some continued education to retain their certification. Should not the USCF do the same?
Every tournament you direct is a continuation of your directing education, and even though you don’t have to take a test, you do have to continue to direct tournaments to maintain the LTD, SrTD or ANTD certification.
Is this right? I was going to try this route (taking the exam closed-book)myself after another tournament or two, but I didn’t see it listed in the experience requirements in this thread.
I don’t suppose anybody can describe how much harder the Senior TD exam is than the LTD, can they? I passed the LTD exam closed book (self-imposed) with relative ease – I found one mistake when I opened my book, but would have still easily scored high enough to pass.
Continuing education does NOT ensure that licensed professionals are not currently making any mistakes based on poor knowledge.
The USCF does run TD seminars, for example at the US Open, in large part to help improve the knowledge base of the TDs who are able to attend. The Forums also serve as a place to improve one’s TD skills.