I could try to upload them with the VPN on again. Then cut it off if there is trouble.
I donât think Iâve ever run across a cell phone that explicitly dealt with zipped files. Not sure about the file picker issue, but it seems unlikely. And the bigger question is, are there any pairing programs capable of running on a cell phone that could generate the 3 DBF files there? Otherwise, how would they get on the cell phone in the first place?
You can use a cell phone to view player and tournament information, but it might take a separate screen layout to make it really useful on small-screen devices. (Itâs not just a pixel issue itâs a readability issue.)
I believe the plan is to have an app both for access to player/tournament data and for TDs to use for tournament input, but that wonât be part of the initial launch. I know US Chess is already working with an app developer.
It doesnât hurt to keep trying. It could be some kind of timing-related issue, I know we had that during the alpha testing but I thought the beta system was scaled up to avoid that. Iâve successfully uploaded some really large files (SuperNationals VIII) on the beta server.
VPNs can do weird stuff. I know when I use the VPN to get inside the US Chess firewall, my IP address changes and web servers think Iâm in Asheville NC, so itâs probably bouncing packets through the Epsilon network, which would increase network latency times. We also had to have Epsilon whitelist the alpha and beta servers because we were getting insecure server warnings with the VPN in place, so it could be something specific to the ISP being used.
Malware software (Norton etc) could also be a factor, though usually thatâs on inbound files, not outbound ones.
It doesnât hurt to keep trying. It could be some kind of timing-related issue, I know we had that during the alpha testing but I thought the beta system was scaled up to avoid that. Iâve successfully uploaded some really large files (SuperNationals VIII) on the beta server.
VPNs can do weird stuff. I know when I use the VPN to get inside the US Chess firewall, my IP address changes and web servers think Iâm in Asheville NC, so itâs probably bouncing packets through the Epsilon network, which would increase network latency times. We also had to have Epsilon whitelist the alpha and beta servers because we were getting insecure server warnings with the VPN in place, so it could be something specific to the ISP being used.
Malware software (Norton etc) could also be a factor, though usually thatâs on inbound files, not outbound ones. But when one computer works and another one in the same location doesnât, thatâs often something specific to that computer.
If there is a Chief TD for a tournament and the Section Chief TD field is left blank, I would like to think the Chief TD of the tournament should be assumed to be the Section Chief TD. There shouldnât be a need to duplicate information in this part of the rating submission process.
1 Like
I believe the only field that is required is the tournament chief TD.
Iâm fine with leaving the section chief field blank, but I also donât see a problem with someone being listed both in the tournament TD area and in the section TD area, as those arenât conflicting roles, theyâre complementary ones, clarifying who did what.
Thatâs different from the FIDE requirement that all arbiters working in FIDE-rated sections must hold FIDE certification. IMHO, the best way to handle that in terms of reporting events to FIDE is to only list on the FIDE rating report the arbiters listed for the FIDE-rated section.
Does the TDAC, or whatever the abbreviation is, not care that we put on t he name of an organizer?
The organizer field was initially intended only for FIDE events. FIDE has an organizer certification program, US Chess doesnât, it assumes the affiliate is the organizer (or designates someone to serve that function) for any event rated under its affiliate ID. US Chess also assumes the affiliate/organizer is competent to run the event.
And the affiliate remains on the hook for the event if there are problems that could result in sanctions, such as not paying guaranteed prizes.
And thereâs no requirement for an officer of a US Chess affiliate to be a US Chess member or even have a member ID, though most do.
It goes the other way for USCF. The files only carry section chief td information; the tournament level chief td has to be entered separately in the current system (and currently in the beta that canât be one of the section chiefs you already entered).
âŚbut yes, if you could enter the chief tournament TD that should flow down.
Thatâs not correct, the 2C draft format that is the one used for most events has a field for both the tournament chief TD and the tournament assistant chief TD.
Huh. I was thinking that because it gets entered in separately from the files in the current USCF flowâŚ.and is mandatory. Why isnât it read from the file, then?
Maybe it wasnât entered when the file was created.
The tournament TD fields are in the TH file, the section TD fields are in the TS file. You can probably load them in Excel and see what the contents are, thatâs what Iâve done at times.
I tried loading the SuperNationals DBF files, it came up with chief and assistant tournament TDs as well as chief and assistants for each section.
We run double round robin events almost every week. You simply use the tournament pairing program to convert to single games and then upload.
that field is NOT mandatory
Tom Langland testing 09/27/25
1. I donât see any information about âDirectorshipâ.
¡ Certification Level
¡ FIDE Certification
¡ Safe Sport Status
¡ Tournaments Directed (Chief or Asst. Chief) (separated by online versus OTB)
¡ Tournaments Worked (separated by online versus OTB)
¡ Sections Worked *(separated by online versus OTB)
2. On the Events Details Page
No reference to Championship Event type. (National Championship Event, National Side Event, State Championship Event)
3. I believe we should be still tracking Event Organizer (whether FIDE or not) and then be able to see an individual organizerâs history (separated by OTB and online). If I am looking for someone to help organize an event, this information would be extremely valuable, also useful for âOrganizer of the Yearâ award(s).
4. Chief TD and Assistant Chief TD need to be authorized TDs for the Affiliate.
5. Participant coding. I may have sections that primarily involved School-age player, but are not JTP. This forces an error of âJTP-K12 requires a Scholastic Affiliate (H)â
6. For the Total Pts for a player, can that be in BOLD font (like the last name)?
7.Having the results boxes color coded:
GREEN Result passes verification
RED Incompatible Opponent/Result
THISTLEN Color coding inconsistent
ORANGE Multiple games against same opponent
KHAKI Forfeits
LIGHTGREEN Cross Round Pairing Detected (adjacent rounds only)
LIGHT BLUE Byes
VIOLET PairedâNo Result Yet (primarily for correspondence events)
SILVER Unpaired
This information is very useful for Tournament Directors to swiftly review the games and quickly see any anomalies that need to be addressed.
8. Getting âMembership Inactiveâ error, even when Expiration Date next to it is in the future.
9. Still getting 126(!) Alerts for âState does not match memberâ
I uploaded feedback to the Google Feedback forms. I have more feedback. Now its says:
*
âYouâve already responded*
We sincerely appreciate your feedback, thank you!
You can fill out this form only once.
Try contacting the owner of the form if you think this is a mistake.
Now that you mention it, it does appear * may indicate something different from every other form there.
DrCheck, try using a different Gmail account to send in a 2nd critique. You may have to sign out of the first email account before using a 2nd account.
It (2C format) has been living in the forum for years (8+ years?). Now you are saying that ânever mindâ we went back to previous version w/o knowing how many developers (programs) have been using that 2C format? I am not the only one, we just found Chessnut using 2C format. I bet there is no logs how many files/program has been uploaded using 2C format that is why discarded. Please put it on Leago and tell that backward compatibility is their responsibility for current parser.
I think you misunderstood me. The 2C format is and will continue to be supported, but an inconsistency in the format as published (in 2006) was corrected last week.
There are multiple ânumericâ fields that should be âcharâ fields. The old parser handled both field types, the Leago ones did not, but I believe that will be one of the changes made on the Beta system in the next set of changes to it.