A perfectly good reason to want to accelerate. Not necessarily a good reason not to learn from Mr. Schulte’s experience and the wisdom of those who gave him counsel.
I wouldn’t recommend short circuiting the experience requirement and taking the closed book exam either. It’s not just that it is more difficult. You might be able to understand the rules well enough to pass it, but nothing can replace experience. Practice makes better. Personally I’m not in favor in shortening the requirements even for doing closed book. I wouldn’t be opposed to increasing the experience requirement, but it’s not bad as it is. It works most of the time, but I’ve see a few TDs that have passed the Senior TD test that I didn’t think were really ready. They may end being good TDs, but were barely there on experience.
The problem is that there are very few tournaments in my area that get 50+ players so getting the experience requirements necessary to become a Senior TD would be very difficult.
It’s hard not to get at least 50 players for a scholastic tournament. The pandemic certainly makes running one more challenging, but I would suggest going that route and getting the normal experience requirements rather than trying to take the test closed book. If no one in your area is organizing any, then organize one yourself.
Big scholastic tournaments aren’t what I am interested in running these days. Plus, I would need a lot of assistance to run a big scholastic tournament. Also, most big scholastic tournaments in my area only USCF rate the top section or two (if that) so there usually aren’t 50+ people in the USCF rated sections.
You can JTP the K-3 section even if they do not have current US Chess memberships.
I might do that if I run any scholastic events. However, locally, most scholastic tournaments are split up by rating, not grade.
Well, that same Senior TD would submit tournaments that were played at G/60;d5 for rating at G/65;d5 because he thought G/60;d5 wasn’t suppose to be dual rated and that the programming was incorrectly dual rating events submitted at G/60;d5!
- Why are N’s not included (any longer??) in the list of substitutions for the Senior TD experience. Probably half my experience was at National Scholastics.
- Why wouldn’t B’s as Chief Assistant be fully acceptable in place of C’s (rather than limited to at most two)? While I understand the desire to have people with experience in tournaments with >=50 participants, it’s not clear why 80 would be more desirable than 150.
- Most Ns are also B (b2 for A1/A2/B1/B2 experience) or C (a2/a3 also for B and A experience). An N or 20 players does not usually provide the chief assistant experience of larger events. If you are chief assistant to a C or larger sized N then it can be used for a2/a3 for SrTD and then reused for c for ANTD and c or d for NTD.
- They are already fully acceptable:
- Applicants.
Applicants for promotion of TD certification level shall provide the technical director with the names, dates, and
number of entrants of the tournaments that satisfy the experience requirements. Upon request, applicants will present
written verification of their claimed experience requirements.
TD TIP: Tournament categories are backwards compatible for TD credit. For example: A five round Category
C tournament (or a single Category C section of a tournament) with 55 players can be used to meet a Category D
TD requirement; being the chief assistant at a 180-player five round Category B event can be used to meet a
Category D or Category C chief assistant TD requirement
You’re not going to like my answer, because of what your answer has previously been about being a delegate from Washington. Still, it’s the same principle. If you want to succeed as a TD, you’ll have to have a lot of different mentors. This is a feature, not a bug. If you’re in an area with a lot of large tournaments, then it will likely take care of itself, but if you’re in a lot of areas, apparently including Vancouver-Portland, you really need to be willing to travel. Many of us welcome the chance to have TDs looking to improve their skills, and possibly their certification volunteer at their events. Some are even able to hire aspiring TDs.
Alex Relyea
Chief
201909023612 - >50 players
201807080722 - exactly 50 players (TD/A shows 53 but that is because three players were double-counted due to cross-sectional pairings)
Chief assistant
201809036452 - >50 players
Since quads are only three rounds and wouldn’t count for SrTD or higher requirements, for tournaments of <50 players you’ve had 18 as chief, 5 as chief assistant, and 16 more blitz/quick as chief. You can get the b6 substitution. You can organize a category R(s) for the (single) b7/b8 substitution. The b1 substitution was available at last month’s on-line TDCC meeting. Doing 50-player-and-up on-line tournaments could give one or two b9 substitutions.
Taking the test closed book requires one more 50+ player, 4+ round Swiss.
Taking the test at home open book requires three more 50+ player, 4+ round Swisses plus three more a3 requirements that can be met by using substitutions (in addition to the b6 substitution you are already able to use).
I will be running a 50+ player tournament over Labor Day Weekend. Then I will only need to pass the Senior TD test closed book to become a Senior TD.
Taking the test closed book is difficult. In case that option doesn’t work you should continue seeking out 50+ player tournaments to do. As a reminder of something you probably know already, there is a two-month wait after failing a SrTD test before being able to take one again.
OK, if that’s the case, why are the unadorned “A” and “B” included here:
That makes no sense. I understand restricting the number of A1, A2, B1 and B2 substitutions (though in practice, I would imagine the chief assistant of many B size tournaments would either be the de facto floor chief or pairing chief), but not the A and B alone. If A and B are acceptable for C, then b2 becomes a3 with the restriction that you’re working under an NTD or ANTD while a3 allows you to be working under just a Senior TD.
Probably just over-inclusiveness (long-standing over-inclusiveness) that has never been noticed before because most people focus on using A and B as easily covering for a C in a2 or a3 (or a1 for chief TD) and thus don’t focus on it in b2.
It may be time for a laundry list of minor changes that still maintain the current implementation of the requirements:
rename 26b5 to 26d
rename 30b10 to 30f
remove B and A from 30b3 (while keeping A1, A2, B1, B2)
pull the TD tip for 6 directly into the rule
probably other clarifications
Excellent idea! Many sections of the rulebook are in need of something like this.
Is the Senior TD test just about over-the-board play or does it include online play, correspondence play, etc.?
I don’t know if any online-specific questions have been added yet, but there was discussion in the Rules workshop about allowing affiliates to run correspondence events and submit them for rating. (Currently all correspondence events have to be administered/directed by the office.)
This would likely involve updating the correspondence ratings system to use formulas similar to those used for OTB and online events, rating correspondence events when they are complete rather than one game at a time. (The correspondence ratings system for the most part still uses the formulas that were in effect prior to 1991.)
Because we would need certified TDs to handle correspondence events, questions may need to be added to the exams on issues that are specific to correspondence chess. Getting certified for certain types of events involves being approved by an outside agency, somewhat similar to being certified to run FIDE events, and that would need to be worked out as well.
Updating the exams is not a simple matter, and the idea of going to online testing (which I have advocated for many years) would require creating a very large test bank of questions, perhaps 500 or more, for both the club/local and the senior exam. One person who might have been willing to write a large number of questions is no longer with us.
1-0