Is the Chicago Open format changing in 2010? It appears that if over 2100+ rated you will be in the Open section, therefore playing all days for 9 rounds. Where as the under 2100 sections play 7 rounds with options for 2-3 day schedule. Is this accurate?
Apparently. He’s eliminated the U2300 section and made the top section nine rounds instead of seven, presumably to allow title norms.
I’m very disappointed that the U2300 section was eliminated. As far as I know, he was the only one offering a U2300 section anywhere. I made a point of going to Chicago this year (from NH) just for that. I won’t be going back in 2010.
I wonder why the section was dropped? It seems to have been popular (80+ both of the last two years), while the Open still drew about 50 each of those years.
– Hal Terrie
I think adding two rounds to allow for norms was a GREAT addition!
Michael Aigner
It’s obvious it’s for the norms which is a great idea, assuming he gets clearance to use his standard time control (40/120 SD 60 w/5 sec delay), which he should as I think it was oversight that delay was left off the approved time controls. I believe USCF has already lodged a formal request on this matter.
However there’s more logic to combining the sections and that’s the foreign federation requirement. For a Swiss based norm, you’d need 20 FIDE rated foreign players, from 3 different federations at least, with 10 of them having norm earned titles (WIM,WGM,IM,GM). This increases the chances of meeting title requirements. Otherwise you’d need to meet the mix during your 9 rounds.
It looks like the Philly Open scheduled for March 31 2010 is using the same format. Everyone over 2100 will have to play in the open section for 9 rounds. Hmm, this is an interesting trend.
Keep in mind organizers can pretty much run whatever events they want. I suggest if you have questions, you contact Bill Goichberg.
Though this is a bit inconvenient (I’ll have to take 2 days off of work now to play in the Open), it’s also exciting that norms are possible, even though it’s highly unlikely that I would achieve one.
That is correct. If the Under 2300 Section is retained, there will be fewer foreign players in the Open and less chance of having 20 FIDE rated foreigners.
Bill Goichberg
While I haven’t looked at previous years participation, I doubt you have many if at all WIM/WGM/IM/GM in the U2300 section so I don’t think this will help making the norm a swiss norm. You’ll probably have more FM and non-titled foreign players.
However this can still help by giving potentially more foreign players to have norm seekers meet their required foreign federation mix (4 out of nine have to be foreign, with at least 2 different federations).
Has there been an update about whether FIDE has approved the 40/2 SD/1 time control for norms?
I don’t know whether the Presidential Board has even had the request made to it yet.
40/2 hrs, SD/1 is approved by FIDE for norms. The question is whether a 5 second delay may be used. However, I assume the answer is still “don’t know.”
FIDE has postponed until January 2011 the implementation/enforcement of the new time controls. That allows more discussion at the next congress and allows the USCF FIDE Reps and the EB time to make proposals.
FIDE is also looking at any norm tournaments submitted from the US with increased scrutiny, actually looking at round by round pairings for discrepancies and obvious switches that might look ok under our Rule 28T, but violate FIDE pairing standards.
Mike
That’s not surprising to me, Mike, what is surprising is that it took FIDE this long to start doing that. When I went to the meetings at the 2006 Olympiad, the general reaction I got from most FIDE officials is that the USCF is a bunch of scofflaws.
Let me clarify my statement a little bit…FIDE is delaying the restriction on time controls until it can be discussed at the next Congress in September. It will then implement those changes resulting from the congress in January 2011.
MA
Do not be surprised if FIDE’s response is to allow increment/delay as part of acceptable time controls but also to require that other FIDE rules, ones generally ignored in the USA, are more strictly followed.
Has anyone yet put together a list of the rules differences between USCF and FIDE?
That was one of the questions (to name at least 10 differences) on the test to become a FIDE Arbiter that the USCF used to administer before the EB, in their infinite wisdom, decided it was no longer necessary and removed that requirement.
Thankfully FIDE have got smart and introduced their own test via the FIDE Arbiter seminars to help protect the integrity of that particular title.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane 
However it doesn’t answer the question asked 