Well, that’s why they say a camel is a horse designed by a committee, and a platypus is a bunny designed by a task force.
Yeah, it’s kinda why I suggested that you might as well take on all the issues and fix’em. And then everyone will be forever in your debt. 
And it would probably have been better if the rulebook had not combined a rule requiring the delay/increment to be explicit, with a rule describing what the notation should be.
The moderators tried to separate the two forum topics, but with the combined rule, the attempt at separation didn’t work too well.
Concerning the (presumably) main point of 5B2 – the requirement to explicitly announce delay or increment – I agree with Bob Messenger’s suggestions.
Bill Smythe
According to Cheryle Bruce the deadline for submitting or modifying ADMs is June 2nd. I’ll think about the time control specification issue next week when I’m not so busy and possibly make changes to the ADMs that I’ve submitted.
Does the name of the tournament count under Rule 5B2? There are plenty of events currently titled “G/30 Quads” or “John Doe Memorial G/45”. IMO it would feel a bit awkward to include the time delay in the title, but maybe that’s the intent of the rule authors.
Is the event name important information? Not for ratings purposes. There was an event with ‘G/61’ in the event name a few years ago, but it was initially submitted with a G/60 time control and dual-rated. (It was subsequently corrected by the TD.)
It is good to be thrashing these issues out in advance, rather than have the office decide what the rule means. There will always be unanticipated situations, of course.
The new tournament I run is called “Quad 45” and it would be strange to call it “Quad 45,d5”. The event name ultimately isn’t important for rating purposes but we aren’t we talking about listing the delay or increment in all advanced publicity?
Gee, I thought we were talking about how to best CHANGE the rule!
I doubt if that’s the intent. Calling an event “G/30” in the title, but listing the time control as “G/30 d/5” or “G/30 d/0” in the main text, should be OK.
OTOH, calling an event “G/30” in the title, but failing to include time control details within the main text, seems questionable – regardless of whether the organizer intended “G/30 d/5” or “G/30 d/0”.
In other words, listing a partial time control in the title should be OK only if the complete time control appears within the text.
Bill Smythe
In the past when the time control was G45/d5, did people change the tournament name? The tournament name is there to provide a general idea to participants of what the tournament is about in order to attract them. The details are to provide the details. Do we need to go so far as to say “you can’t call the tournament the ‘John Doe 40/2’ if the time control is G/15?” Can’t common sense and the market make SOME of the decisions?
Common sense is not so common—Voltaire
If you look through Chess Life, how many of the tournaments listed there have a name that conveys a lot of information about the event? Few, I suspect.
Is the word ‘scholastic’ in the event name? If so, does that mean that there is no section that adults may play in? Not necessarily.
Is the word ‘open’ in the event name? If so, does that mean the event is truly open to anyone? Not necessarily. (Section names are a separate issue, an ‘open’ section might not be very open at all.)
Perhaps the way to fix 5B2 is to carve out what types of advance publicity are exempt from it. A calendar of upcoming events, which is not intended to convey full information about any of the events listed, should be exempt. Thus if it only includes things like the event name, dates and location, but nothing about round times, entry fees or prizes, is time control information needed? Even if the calendar includes things like whether the event is FIDE rated or how many Grand Prix points the event offers, does that constitute a complete enough description to require time control information?
But a full-page tournament flyer, or a TLA or display ad in Chess Life, or even a detailed email blast, any of which should contain all the things players generally want to know before deciding whether to enter, including round times, entry fees and prizes, clearly those should include full time control information as well.
In case I was unclear – in my prior post, when I said “… a general idea to participants of what the tournament is about in order to attract them” I tried to follow-up with information that I wasn’t saying that the event title was all encompassing - simply enough information to attract a person to read further. For example, unless I really wanted to play this weekend and no other events were available, an event labeled “scholastic” likely would not get my attention (even though I know some scholastic events have adult or coach sections.)
If an event has words like: hex, quad, open, class, quick - it gives me some idea of the tournament type. If a dollar amount is in the heading, it tells me something, etc. Again, I’m not saying that the title was intended to provide ALL the information - in fact - precisely the opposite. Just enough information to get me to read further. That’s why G/45 d/5 is unnecessary - because the title is not supposed to be exact.
I agree that having something like ‘G/45’ or ‘Blitz’ in the event name is meant to entice someone to read further, not be the complete time control information. But a literal interpretation of 5B2 would seem to say it must include the increment delay.
The goal is to have rules that make sense both for members and for the USCF office, which leads to consistent application of those rules.
The key issue may be: Why is it important for prospective players to have full time control information, and when is that information both needed and useful?
Seems like tourney details should address it. I hesitate for us to overlegislate; we’ll end up recreating FINRA.
Have you looked at the size of the USCF rulebook, Kevin? Many, possibly most, of those rules are there because ‘common sense’ is too hard to define or enforce.
Here is my modified ADM. I decided to propose using d5 for delay and inc/30 for increment, and I got rid of the 40/120, SD/60 d5 example. There are already examples which would show this as 40/120 G/60 d/5 (or d5 if my ADMs pass), with no commas.
Here is part of an email I received today, about an upcoming rated tournament; the info is copied from the organizer’s no-frills Web site. I am near-certain there is no TLA for this event. Assuming the revised rule takes effect next year, what happens? Does the office staff scan the 'Web searching for stuff like this? Or do they wait to get an unlikely complaint or question from a player?
Quads at the Moose
Sunday June 8th
Registration 10:30-11:00
Entry Fee $12 at site cash only
Time control G/40
Prize 1st in each quad $35
if perfect 3-0 $40
Quad may be changed to swiss depending on number of entries
USCF membership required
The email and website would violate the rule since they don’t specify the delay or increment. I don’t think it should be up to the USCF office to search the web for rules violations like this. The office should make sure that the delay or increment is specified in TLAs (which wouldn’t apply in this case if there is no TLA) and refer any complaints to the TDCC.
Come to think of it I’m not sure the TDCC is the right committee for this since the organizer isn’t necessarily a certified TD, but since we don’t have a committee to supervise organizers and (I would guess) most organizers are also TDs it’s the best choice I can think of.
The Rules Committee can deal with issues like this just fine.