What is the difference between open and reserve in a tournament
That really depends. Without being snarky, please ask the tournament organizer.
Alex Relyea
In an “open” section, anyone can play with no restrictions on rating. In a “reserve” section, the players above a designated rating may not play in the section. The “reserve” section can also be designated “premier”, “booster”, “novice”, or some other name to distinguish it from the “open”. It is just another way to name a section. The “reserve” might have a limit like for U1800 players only. In class tournaments, the names of the sections go overtly by rating, for example, Open, U2000, U1700, U1400, etc. to draw more players in those rating categories.
Technically “open” means open to all (mainly top players allowed), but often there is a rating restriction - usually a minimum rating rather than a maximum. Some tournaments instead label this as “Premier” instead of open to indicate that it is for top players only. I don’t think I’ve ever seen Premier used for a reserve section (which is always an “Under” type section).
Adding to Bill’s comment, check the details when looking at the section names. A U2000 section might allow ratings under 2030. A class A section might have a minimum rating of 1600 (you can play up one section). A Premier section might have a minimum current rating, or a minimum peak rating, or any established rating (no provisional ratings and no unrateds) or something else.
An Open section may be open to all players but may have an additional fee for players below a certain rating.
I have occasionally seen “open” sections with a lower rating limit. Technically, these should not be called “open”. As mentioned upthread, “premier” or “championship” would be a better name for such sections.
The same would be true of an “open” section that did not allow unrated players to enter it.
Bill Smythe
Open does not necessarily mean anyone can enter. There may be restrictions based on things other than rating, such as age, grade in school or location. But the open section is generally the one with the fewest restrictions.
A ‘reserve’ section is often the first section below the ‘open’ section of an event, with more restrictions than for the open section. But there could also be a ‘premier’ section, which may or may not be more restrictive than the ‘reserve’ section.
As Lewis Carroll wrote:
I’ve seen strict class sections (class A is only for people rated 1800-1999), 100-point limits (I used to do a scholastic with unrated, U600, 600-699, 700-799, 800-899, 900-999, 1000-1099. 1100-1199 and 1200+), under sections (U2000 could have an 1100 playing in it) and double classes (class A has a lower limit of one class, thus allowing 1600-1999 while B allows 1400-1799, C allows 1201599, etc.).
Although it is true that “anyone” can enter an open section, in practice the open section may be the most restricted especially when we look at other sports. Open generally means no upper limit as opposed to no lower limit. In tennis, for example, open events like the French Open, US Open, Wimbledon, etc. allow anyone to enter as long as they can qualify. Qualifying in this context means roughly top 150 in the world.
If we extrapolate that to chess, then qualifying means anyone with a minimum rating requirement. This is why I personally don’t have a problem with calling a section “Open” when there is a minimum eligibility requirement. In a class tournament with many sections, it probably does make more sense to call the top one Premier to differentiate it more from Expert, Class A, etc. But, in tournaments with only 2 or 3 sections (like open, reserve, booster), it seems totally fine to me to call it “Open”.
Regardless, though, it’s just a name. As long as the eligibility requirements (if any) are properly displayed, it doesn’t matter that much what it’s called.
Back in the 1970s I saw a bunch of CCA tournaments that were “open to all rated over 500 or unrated”. In those days virtually nobody was rated below 500. So I asked Bill Goichberg what that entry limitation was all about.
His response was “Aha, somebody finally noticed.” Then he explained that, whenever he wrote “open to all” in a section description, the Chess Life editor would invariably delete that phrase. He was annoyed that the entry requirements were omitted from the TLAs for his open sections. Once he started specifying “open to all rated over 500 or unrated”, Chess Life stopped editing out his entry requirements.
Bill Smythe
Of course, the historical context is that in golf and tennis, “Open” means open to professionals. Prior to 1968, the tennis US Open was the US National Championship.
I saw an article the other day about a purple band of light being seen in northern Canada that is not part of the Northern Lights. Amateur astronomers and photographers have been calling it ‘Steve’ for years, now the scientists have concocted an acronym for STEVE: Strong Thermal Emission Velocity Enhancement
In talking to another organizer about tournament setup and section nomenclature, he noted that keeping it simple was the key. When too many limits and complications are placed, it turns the players off and they look elsewhere for a more equitable place to play. What really p-i-s-s-e-s players off is when they have to pay more in order to play up a section or two just for the experience of seeing what it is like to play up. They know that the added fee is designed to keep them out of a section and they feel disrespected by the organizer and the TDs. A true “Open” section should be open to everyone. I noticed lately that the CCA is calling its top section a “Major section”, which allows it to do just about whatever it wants in limiting the section. When it takes 15 minutes to read a TLA, it is time for the average tournament player to skip it and find another event.
Of course, the historical context is that in golf and tennis, “Open” means open to professionals.
Eh? I think Francis Ouimet was a golf amateur who famously won the U.S. Open.
Open to professionals. Not restricted to professionals.
Amateurs can qualify for the US Open Golf Tournament, a half-dozen or so do every year.
yes, exactly.
…scot…
Yes and no. Sometimes the strongest players in the section don’t want to play against players hundreds of points below them. They want to play in the top sections for the same reason the weaker players do. So if there is a play-up fee, perhaps that would at least create a bit better balance.
I like the idea of limiting playing up to those who are within, say, 100 or 200 rating points of the division line. If, for example, there is a top section (whether it is called Premier or whatever) and an under-1800 section, then perhaps the option to play up should be available only to those rated at least 1700 or 1600.
I agree, and in fact IMHO even a play-up fee is a bit inappropriate for an “Open” section.
Amen. Such a name is appropriate whether or not there is a lower rating limit, and whether or not there is a play-up fee.
Bill Smythe