You have ONE parent that would like his son to use a MonRoi, but you feel that you need a special rule to ban the devices. Then you say he’s welcome to play if HE follows the same rules of decency as everybody else???
You need to take a careful look at what you’re saying.
The only reason these things are being said is in response to your attacks. Please go back an read the original post.
Have you seen the scene in the movie, Seartching for Bobby Fischer I’m talking about the one where parents were removed from the tournament room. The kids get along just fine.
Mark, have you talked to some of the other TDs in the area? Do they have similar thoughts?
I agree with you regarding the videocamera. It freaked a few of the little guys out and we can’t accomodate every parent who might want to set up a camera. However, I don’t understand your opposition to the MonRoi. I can see a rule stating it can’t be used for a draw claim because noone else in that section would have that benefit. But I’m not sure anything beyond that is necessary.
confrontations…hmmmm…
As I said earlier I could use the video camera in 80% of the tournaments we went to. I probably tried to make my point on the learning aspect of the video camera to the TD’s that didn’t allow it.
I have since moved away from video cameras to the more worldwide respected monroi system. Same result. I’m OK with that. The point being if kids are coached better earlier, the United States will compete better in the international arena. If kids start earlier, the will be stronger players. If all kids in the U.S. had parents that video taped their games to make them better or used monroi and actually went over their games after the tournament from the age of 4 or 5, maybe we would have more great players home grown playing for a world championships.
My friend who has a monroi and plays in Ky, TN, IN tournaments has a 4 year old son that can work his brothers monroi just fine. He can’t write yet. He’s trying his first chess camp this week. He will be playing in tournaments this fall probably using a monroi. I look forward to the advances he will make because of his fathers dedication to his son’s new pasttime. With the proper studying, which would be fairly difficult with his current writing level, he will learn from his games and eventually help push up the talent level in scholastic chess.
I could be wrong here, but I think the biggest problem with the video camera was that he called ahead of time for permission (unless I’m getting my history confused here). I’d have been rather hot myself after making a 3 hour drive only to have the matter “corrected” that way.
It just sounds funny now for you to come up with this new rule when you know that he’s a big supporter of the MonRoi and you don’t have any other players that use one. 
As far as writting first or making the move first – I think it’s a bad idea to try to turn back the clock on this rule. Instead, I’d suggest simply announcing that penalties won’t be assessed this year for violating this rule. If this is going to be the USCF rule, then you should start getting your players and coaches used to the idea. I think this would be a better approach than a rule variation, IMHO. In fact, wasn’t that what the rules committee recommended?
Mark,
I know you initially asked the “rules committe” to give you an answer on this topic.
Have you considered the responses you’re getting from this message board as a majority of opinion?
And I suppose if my future 1st grader plays up in a K-5 section it will be warmly welcomed to use a monroi?
Comparing chess scorekeeping to the inability to do math because you use a calculator is a bad analogy. When I took the CPA exam years ago part of my preparation was doing math longhand since we couldn’t use calculators in the exam room. Everyone certainly knew how to do math, but we were out of practice at doing it rapidly and proficiently. Sure enough, one of the problems was 90% math. My cohorts who hadn’t practiced doing it manually took 90 minutes on a problem I did in 45. That was quite a competitive advantage for me.
I agree with those who sense that this decision is more targeted to one parent than to the protection of the other kids from the evils of chess illiteracy or being freaked out by a MonRoi. I just don’t agree with this analogy. Besides, it’s highly unlikely a kid will be serious enough to warrant purchase of a MonRoi without at least playing in a few events requiring scorekeeping. By the time a parent bought one the kid would know how to keep score.
We would have no problem with it at all in the K-5 section, in fact may have not problem with it in any section unless the variation is posted. This is definately not the problem the video camera was and is much less likely to cause the disruption round to round that the camera would.
Again, I am just trying to avoid avoidable issues in our K-1, and K-3 sections. The biggest complaint we ever get by far is running the tournaments on time, and part of getting that done properly is anticipating problems and avoiding them. The very reason in the past that you have suggested to others that you enjoy the tournaments in our area is the care that we take in running a smooth tournament, and that is not by chance.
You may be right, that we are making an issue out of something that shouldn’t have an issue made out of it. I might suggest that it is not as easy to put on a good tournament as some might think and it is often the attention to these kind of details that get a good job done. It was an oversight that caused our problems last year and we are simply trying to avoid a similar situation again this year.
You really might be suprised to hear but what we experienced last year was the most distasteful event of our season and we just don’t need to experience anything like that again.
Just like the CPA exam has not been dumbed down simply because a candidate is now allowed to use a calculator, I don’t see the lack of learning to keep score as being a reason for banning the use of a Monroi or similar device.
I remember telling my son when he was in first grade that he needed to start keeping score of his games. I don’t remember giving him much instruction on the nomenclature of keeping score as he was fairly quick on understanding the concept.
My reasoning for having him keep score was two fold, to be able to look at the game afterwards and to have him slow down a bit at the board. Both of these goals can be accomplished with a Monroi. I don’t see a child being set back from not learning to keep score with pencil and paper.
mnibb,
You are certainly within your rights as an organizer to limit those devices…for now. Once the delegates approve the rules committee’s proposal in August and it becomes enforced, probably Jan 1. 2007, you will not.
I have had the same player in question use his device at two of my tournaments and have had no problems.
Sure you may have to explain to some ignorant parents what the device is, but so what? That will not slow down the running of the tournament. It certainly does NOT provide the player an advantage DURING the chess tournament. If anything the device will slow him down since notation is not required at that level.
All your proposal really does is take away an opportunity for a dad to help study with his son the game they both love. What a shame.
I would seriously rethink this proposal if I were you. Writing variations with ostensibly one parent in mind is a very bad idea, not to mention the fact that entertaining the idea sends a message to other potential players and their parents in the area, like me and my three sons.
The MonRoi was a minor part of the variation. The most important part of it was waiving the “move first then write” provision of the proposed new rule. I think this is obviously the least controversial of the two issues. but probably much more important. I believe more important for K-3 to learn to take notation than to worry about writing or moving first.
You know, I opened an entirely different thread for this because I did not want it to be primarily about the MonRoi device, but a question about Tournament Organization but nobody wants to believe that.
When the commentary on your original post deals 80% with the Monroi, I can see where people took your post as being anti-Monroi and not about writing the move first.
That being said, I agree with you that when using pencil and paper writing the move first is not a big issue. As a TD, if this rule is passed as written, I don’t see myself taking much of an action in the way of penalties for players who are “caught” writing their moves first.
I am sorry, I did get side-tracked by the device discussion, but the rule change has come about because of the device, not because of anything else. Even when the rule change is adopted officially I intend to be very careful in penalizing for at least a year. I hope other TDs will as well.
Which brings us back to your original question, mnibb. You said “as an organizer…” When it comes to rules variations, I believe it would be up to the Chief TD, not the organizer. If you are one and the same then obviously this is a non-issue. Now regarding use of equipment, which the device would fall under, the organizer may provide standard equipment usurping the wishes of each player to use their own. Telling a player that they may not use their own standard equipment when another is not provided by the organizer seems to me to be overly restrictive. Does anyone else read it that way?
I can see what you are saying, and it is poorly written. I thought I had avoided the words MonRoi, but the intention was to point out that at the K-3 grade level, it is hoped that the kids would start taking notation and that we would not enforce the “move then write” rule. I did not want to have to deal with electronic notation devices at this age, but I guess it will have to become an issue.
I suppose no one will come if I advertise the tournament this way
I totally sympathize with this, having had a really awful experience with a parent at a tournament I was running. This only happened ONCE, but it sure did make a negative impression on me. It was also very hard on the child involved. I can understand not wanting to repeat the experience, and therefore set expectations up front.
Terry,
No, I’m pretty sure mnibb was correct on who should take the responsibility for rule variations. A major variation has to be announced in advance and that would clearly be the organizer’s job. The TD enforces the rules – the organizer determines what the tournament rules ARE.
Simply announcing that penalties wouldn’t be assessed yet (for writting first) might be more of a TD function. The way I’d interpret things, this wouldn’t be a rule variation, but just a TD following the guidance from the rules committee. I don’t think it would even REQUIRE an announcement (though the MonRoi issue certainly would).
mnibb,
You’re right to bring this up for discussion NOW. While I don’t agree with your proposed rule variation, discussing it NOW means you don’t have to at a tournament. Organization is obviously one of the strong points for your tournaments and I think they probably run smoother than most.
I suspect that in practice even announcing a rule variation in advance doesn’t get people (primarily the TD) out of having to explain it at the event.