Is there one anywhere? I can’t seem to locate a full TLA. Trying to find the dates of the different schedules.
It doesn’t exist yet. Work will begin on it some time in January. Franc Guadalupe told me he wants to discuss some of the details with me “right after the holidays.”
– Hal Terrie (U.S. Open Committee Chair)
Thanks Hal.
Also do we know if it will be FIDE rated and whether the Barber and Denker will be FIDE rated this year?
I do not know the answers to those questions yet. My guess would be that the main event will continue not to be FIDE rated - but that’s just a guess. I will provide answers as soon as I know them.
Keep in mind that the actual TLA will be written by the U.S. Chess office. My role (and that of the U.S. Open Committee) is purely advisory. They will ask our opinion about some issues but will make the final decisions themselves. If you have any recommendations about features you would like to see in the event, please post them and I will see that your views are made a part of the upcoming discussions.
The same goes for anyone else. If you want to make comments about the U.S. Open’s format for 2016, this thread seems like a reasonable place to post them. I suggest that this is NOT the place to to discuss things like, “Hey, let’s divide it into two sections” or “Let’s make ALL the schedules at least two rounds per day.” No such dramatic changes will happen in 2016, so discussions about such ideas are for another time and place.
– Hal Terrie
Can a tournament be FIDE rated that has multiple schedules? Or do the FIDE rules on multiple schedules only apply to title norms? What would be the FIDE rating expense for a tournament with, for example, 500 entrants?
What will be the suggested time control for the US Open this year? Will there be any variability if there are different schedules?
What is the projected entry fee?
The time control for the traditional schedule section will be using increment in 2016 as the delegate motion from a couple of years ago requires. I expect there will still be multiple schedules (and all will need to be increment I think) but the existence of the multiple schedules will, I believe, make FIDE rating the event impossible.
FIDE rating the 3 scholastic invitational events is certainly possible as none of them have differing schedules and we have all the participants ahead of time to get them registered. The only complication is making sure all of the staff working those events are properly licensed arbiters. I know FIDE rating of those events has been discussed and encouraged by the event staff from 2015, and I don’t know of any serious objections to doing so. There was a delegate motion to that effect at the 2015 meeting which through a technical error did not get properly considered by the delegates, but it was sent to the EB for consideration and there is nothing to prevent the EB from making sure those events are FIDE rated. We discussed those motions at the November EB meeting and that one was tasked to the office for review and recommendation.
I’m pretty sure that a tournament with multiple schedules can be FIDE rated (as, for example, this year’s National Chess Congress was - I submitted the rating report) but can’t be a norm tournament (which is why CCA no longer offers multiple schedules for the Open Section of the World Open etc.)
The real problem with making the U.S. Open FIDE rated is that the whole tournament (other than side events) is in a single section, which means having to register dozens or quite possibly hundreds of players with FIDE.
If memory serves me correctly, the original reason USCF discontinued FIDE rating of the U.S. Open was that there was a rather severe proposal for “licensing of players” floating around in FIDE. I believe the proposal was that all players would have to be registered with FIDE and have a FIDE ID number before the start of the tournament. FIDE would allow national federations to register players after the start of the tournament, but there would be a heavy fine (60 euros, as I remember) for each such player. Additionally, the national federation would have to provide FIDE with copies of identification documents such as a passport for each player registered.
As it happened, that proposal was not approved, and a much weaker form of player licensing was put in place. However, the uncertainty of whether it would have been approved was problematic.
As of July 1, 2014, there is an additional issue. All FIDE rated tournaments must follow the FIDE Laws of Chess, without exception. I just don’t see the U.S. Open being governed by the FIDE Laws of Chess instead of the US Chess Official Rules of Chess.
Good points, Ken.
Ah, so I can come 15 minutes late to the games and write my move down first before playing it. 
If the US Chess rules (not the variations) are being followed, no, you can’t write down your move before playing it, outside of a properly claimed draw by repetition or 50 move rule.
If you were to come 15 minutes late you wouldn’t know if that variation was announced. Also, many FIDE-rated events have a non-zero default time.
Alex Relyea
“It’s a joke, son.” - Foghorn Leghorn
I always show up to my games early and bring chess equipment if necessary. I expect that any rules or variations to be published in advance. I check to see if there is a stack of flyers with rules and variations at large tournaments, as there tend to be frequent changes, especially concerning whether delay or increment are being used. Delay times vary from event to event.
While I do have an increment capable clock (DGT NA), I also have others I like to use depending on the playing environment and sight lines because I have to walk around a bit to stretch my legs and keep my knee loose. Those clocks do not have increment capability but can do delay and are easier to see over a distance. I expect that other players will have non-increment capable clocks. Since the USCF has decided to use increment timing as part of the time control, will it provide clocks like other organizers do for their events that use increment timing? I don’t plan on spending $80 to $140 to buy a new clock.
Is this a joke, too? With Mr. Magar it can be difficult to tell. No increment I’ve been to has had organizer-provided clocks. (Edit: not true, my RR events have).
Alex Relyea
In Illinois, the increment tournaments do have clocks provided. Sevan Muradian is one director that provides clocks for his increment games. Plus, we had an increment time control in Peoria recently where the organizer made sure to have increment capable clocks available, no joke.
As a correction, I don’t provide clocks for addressing increment games. I provide equipment to my and some other local events here in the area, to provide a better quality experience for both players, directors and organizers. Not only does it make the tournament have a nicer look and feel to it but also makes the life of directors better only needing to know a singular clock.
The fact that it addresses the increment challenge is just an added bonus.
I’ve been to two events where increments were used. One of them (the Port of Dubuque tournament in Iowa in January of this year) did provide increment-capable clocks for those who didn’t own one. The other one (a year or two before that) did not. Before that tournament, I bought an increment-capable clock (even though I already unknowingly had one – now I have two). I figure increment time controls are going to become more and more common, so at some point I will need a clock that can do that. For the same reason, I bought a digital clock as soon as delay became a common thing. You can’t stop progress. Considering that I spend hundreds of dollars per year on tournament entry fees, $50 for an increment-capable clock (DGT NA, for one, and I believe the ZMART clocks are in the same price range) seems perfectly reasonable.
Not sure if I missing something here, but as far as I know the only mainstream digital clock that supports delay but not increment is the Saitek Scholastic blue clock. (It’s possible that one of the entry-level DGT ‘folding’ clocks also meets this description, but I very seldom see those clocks at rated events.)
Yes, the one good thing about Saitek clocks is the raised big bright light even a squinting patzer can spot from across the room. So someone who has never played an increment event and whose only digital clock is a Saitek blue will need a Plan B for the 2016 US Open. Since new DGT NAs and allegedly never-used Excalibur Game Time clocks can be purchased online for less than $40 I don’t see that as a deal-breaker.
Not to mention there are already lots of increment events apart from the US Open, and that trend will likely continue…
Of course the whole argument is silly because US Chess will almost certainly provide an alternate time control for those without increment-capable clock.
Alex Relyea
Right. Same holds true for the USATE, which was FIDE-rated for many years but no longer is as of this past February. (Even though one of the TDs for the event believed it was FIDE-rated as of the announcements before round one.)
Neither USATE nor the US Open will be FIDE-rated any time soon if the regs stay as they are. Sort of flies in the face of the argument seen on the forums as to how FIDE really wants to take over all rated chess in the world, even at low amateur level.
And if that really is true they need a Plan B for difficult outlier planets full of rebels, such as here.