That happened to me once in about 1970 at a smallish (by today’s standards) CCA scholastic tournament in Indianapolis, where I was the only TD. On the pairing sheet, I simply wrote “please wait for table assignment” instead of board numbers for the last 8 or so pairings. Three minutes after the round started a couple of the games finished and I was able to assign board numbers to 2 of the pairings. I then retired to the TD-office-slash-skittles-room to catch up on paperwork for about five minutes. Then I went back out to the pairing sheets and found that a few of the parents had picked up on what I was doing and were assigning table numbers as they became available. I thanked them for their help and went back to paperwork.
I wouldn’t necessarily always appreciate “help” from the parents in running a tournament, but this case I obviously had no quarrel with it!
Nowadays, directing is wa-a-a-a-a-ay too easy. Back then, there was work to do while the games were going on – updating the pairing cards (you couldn’t write the pairings on the cards while you were making the pairings, there simply wasn’t enough time), updating the wall chart with the new pairings, updating results on the wall chart as the games finished, etc. Those were the days!
The fourth edition of the rule book had a wonderful chapter that included guidance on table layout and lighting. I think it is highly unfortunate that this material has been lost from the fifth and sixth editions. If it were possible to arrange with the copyright holder to make this material available, I think it would be beneficial for organizers and TDs.
The fourth edition of the rule book had a wonderful chapter that included guidance on table layout and lighting. I think it is highly unfortunate that this material has been lost from the fifth and sixth editions. If it were possible to arrange with the copyright holder to make this material available, I think it would be beneficial for organizers and TDs.
(Edit: I apologize for the duplicate post. I tried to delete it but received the error message “you are not allowed to delete posts in this forum.”)
Interesting about the edit problem, since only a few days ago I submitted a post, and then had second thoughts and deleted it after it had appeared on the Forum.
Chapter 5 of the Fourth Edition of the Rules of Chess, The Well Run Tournament, is the one of which you speak, and was a very helpful section. The following section, Tournament Directors’ Checklists, was as well. Both would need some updating - you don’t really need to bring blank wall charts to the tournament, for example - but I’d love to see them reappear in a future edition of the Rules of Chess.
When I go to tournaments to compete, I take a ring binder that our club uses with extra forms that cover a variety of tournament formats. It has come in handy a couple of times. One time, the TD’s computer crashed completely and he was unable to recover any files. We reconstructed from the available pairing sheet from the first round and hand paired the rest of the tournament using pairing cards, wall charts, and pairing forms. On another occasion, the printer ran out of ink. The TD did not have another cartridge, so I gave him copies of the pairing sheets and wall charts to use so the players could see what was going on. The pairing sheets have a chess themed header and instructions at the bottom how to mark results. The players were fascinated watching how pairings were made, cards switched to adjust for colors, and how score groups were adjusted for odd number of players. They had not seen that for decades, if at all. Old school, redundant, backup can be handy when Murphy’s Law sneaks up on you. BTW, the USCF website has forms you can download, too, if you do not have forms of your own design to use. There is a copy of a pairing card in the Rulebook and more forms in the packet that is available for clubs.
On room and table space, I follow an old unwritten “rule” to use a room with 25-33 1/3% space more than you may need in case there is a higher than expected turnout. It would be extraordinary to have a 50+% explosion of on site entries. At worst we can add the extra tables and chairs and put three boards per 8 foot table. If you know your tournament scene well, you can project what the entries will be within a few players. For example, last month we set up a room expecting 40 entries, with space for 8 more boards, if needed. 38 players entered and we were able to spread things out for the players while strategically placing some fans to improve ventilation and add white noise to mask other ambient noise. Our club has 40 sets and boards to lay out, if necessary.
One of the first tournaments I helped organize we were expecting a turnout of between 80 and 100, we got around 220, with over 100 registering on-site. Fortunately, the hotel had additional space available and was able to set it up quickly. But I was playing my game while running around trying to get a variety of issues worked out, and had several thousand dollars in cash stuffed in my pockets.
Even with accelerated pairing I was paired up in both the first and second rounds, and somehow won them both. So in round 3 I was on board 4 against a multi-time Nebraska state champion, Rich Chess. I got blown away, of course.
Eliminating some of the clerical work has allowed for faster time controls, greater numbers of players per pairer, quicker awards ceremonies and being able to do both back room and floor without essentially abandoning the floor for extended periods. It often seems like the same amount of work per person but a different type of work (possibly with fewer people).
Doing a 480(?) player section at a scholastic national in the late '80s had one primary pairer plus two others writing everything and prepping the cards. Nowadays at nationals you may see more than 700 players in two sections handled by a single pairer (for the 2008 IL state K-8 championship I was the only pairer for the entire tournament of 734 players in four sections).
Hmm, you must have run into a glitch. Normally, you can delete any post you’ve written, even if there have been other posts added, and even if there have been replies to your post, up to 48 hours or so after you submitted the original post.
And if, for any reason, you are not allowed to delete a post (e.g. because more than 48 hours have elapsed), normally the “X” option to delete the post – which appears after the “Quote” and “Edit” options but before the “!” exclam – is no longer present.
Posts can only be deleted by the poster if they’re the most recent post in a thread.
Once they’ve been replied to they can still be edited for a few days, but can no longer be deleted. (I think that also applies if a subsequent post is waiting to be released because the poster is in the moderation queue.)
But, as noted upthread you can delete the content by editing it, I usually put in something like ‘duplicate post deleted’ to make it clear what happened and why.
I normally move duplicate posts to the moderator review area, but in this case I’ll leave the duplicate in the forum to preserve the discussion (which is admittedly off-topic - hopefully the sidebar discussion will end here.)
