Yes, the normal credits must be regular rated (dual also applies). Quick and blitz can only be used in the substitutions.
For just having a simple tournament, there is nothing wrong with having a quick time control. I occasionally do a K-12 JTP as an after-school event that lasts a little over 2 hours. We squeeze in four rounds at G/15;d0.
If these players are currently unrated, then when they finally do play in a regular rated event, it will seed their regular rating from the quick rating, if I remember correctly. Or perhaps it’s just the other way. Nolan can answer this one more concretely.
dajuukes, I appreciate your enthusiasm and don’t want to discourage you. However, I would suggest focusing on improving your skills as a TD rather than worrying about getting the credits needed to advance to Senior TD. Working with experienced TD’s will benefit you much more than being listed as the chief of a section with over 50 players. Quite frankly, one can check off all of the boxes for Senior TD and be downright awful. Build your skills and experience and the credits will come.
Disclaimer: This is unsolicited advice from a NTD who learns something [i]every[/i] time he works with other experienced directors.
The decision as to WHOM shall direct events should be left to area tournament directors with their organizers. Where the responsibility belongs.
Rob Jones
Don’t worry, it will be a fair while before I can accumulate the credits anyway. I’ve contacted my local organization about running the smaller scholastic and weekend tournaments - in order to gain experience (and have a weekend job to pay expenses with). A SrTD certification isn’t worth much without the trust and experience of the organizations around me, in my opinion.
Sounds like you’ve got the right attitude. Learning from other TDs (their successes and mistakes) is easier than learning from only your own mistakes…and a lot more fun.
You’ve already started off well by finding the forum and asking questions. I think you’ll find most TDs are willing to help those coming up the ranks.
With all due respect, I don’t see how you can tout the “gold standard” of US Chess rated events and simultaneously say the local organizers should decide wh should direct. The hybrid of having US Chess set the qualifying standard and the local organizer decide from among those meeting the standard makes sense to me. There are certainly some with the credentials who are awful (the locals should weed those out) and there are some lacking the letters but possessing the skills (lets help them get the letters).
Here’s kind of an interesting table. It shows the number of regular/dual rated events since 6/1/2018 by size and TD level of the chief TD. (Table corrected to reflect TD level of TDs whose membership has lapsed.)
I just made some minor changes to correct the TD level for TDs whose membership has lapsed, but the table is accurate as far as who is listed as the chief TD for the event and that person’s current certification level.
As I said upthread, there are events being directed by TDs who are not certified to handle them. In some cases, the chief TD may have been backed up by a sufficiently high enough certified TD. I think that’s permitted as one way to meet some of the experience requirements.
We’ve never really enforced that rule, in part because it’s not clear what we can do. If we ban the TD from running events, that may deprive some players of the only TD in their area. If we require that the chief TD meet the certification level before we rate the event, we run the risk of not rating some events, which isn’t fair to the players who entered them.
Years ago, John Hillery offered this advice at a Delegates’ Meeting: US Chess should spend more effort getting events rated than finding reasons not to rate them.
I agree that that’s a solid philosophy - but I think there should be a “soft cap” and a “hard cap” like currently outlined in the TD Certification guide. The guide states that Local May not (strictly enforced with exceptions for emergencies) direct a Category B or higher but Should not direct a category C (only a recommendation - but may be investigated if abused). I do think the certification system exists for a reason, but it’s hard to strike a balance between too harsh and too soft.
I looked at one event, and although the chief TD listed is a club TD, the assistant chief TD is an ANTD, so some of these may just be coding issues. If the national office is going to start enforcing TD certification limits, they’ll have to take things like that into account.
The national office has to assume that the information being submitted by the submitting TD is accurate and complete. It’s essentially done on the honor system.
Probably a clerical error, I would imagine. That does make me wonder about the amount of tournaments with chief TDs that weren’t actually there or got swapped, etc. I imagine it’s not terrible common, though, since the “fake” TD has to be aware and alright with the situation.
The fact that the chief TD is also listed as the organizer increases the likelihood that there’s a clerical data issue here.
If there are events being listed with a chief TD who wasn’t involved in the event, I’m not sure that TD would be notified that his/her ID was being used.
One of the reasons that TD/A has a place for affiliates to maintain a list of TDs authorized to direct events using that affiliate is because there was a problem back before TD/A was written with some TDs sending in rating reports listing the sponsoring affiliate without that affiliate’s consent. That’s also why we always send the first copy of the validation report for an event to the sponsoring affiliate, so that the affiliate is aware what events are being submitted on their behalf. If we’re not also sending a copy to the listed chief TD, we probably should. (Update: we are now doing this.)
With all due respect, all too often, one cannot judge the quality of tds by their levels. I have known and worked with several CLUB tds in the past who, quite frankly were more capable than far higher levels of
TDs, who at least a few times each year, ran “B” level tournaments. Now, these individuals did eventually
migrate to local level as their club cert expired and they were forced to do so. So “Gold Standard” hmm,
exactly according to whom? If those attending the events are delighted, and all goes well, exactly what does US Chess making a fuss accomplish? Far bigger fish to fry, my good man, far bigger fish.
From Mike Nolan’s Table
Club TDs, and Local TDs combined -
100-199 474 “B” 56 Club 133 local 189 Total 40% of all B Tournaments run by local or club tournament directors. HMM, now why is this? I would argue that a very good number of these tournament directors
do qualify to test for the next higher level, yet, for whatever reason, simply choose not to. Secondly, many
of these events, I would be willing to bet, have higher level tournament directors close at hand, to advise and consult with as necessary. It is vital in the teaching of new levels of TDs to gradually relinquish some
of the authority to them so that they can grow to direct and organize future generations of US chess events.
Last time I checked, I am certainly not getting younger. Point being that there is far more to consider with
the issue presented than simple raw numbers which quite frankly all too often, do not paint a true picture.
HMM, painting pictures without truly looking at the data, and using data all too often without common sense.
I believe the gentleman’s name was Hillery that you quoted as saying US Chess was better served by having events rated than not. So, given the data that you, yourself supplied, whom exactly would be served by the sanctioning of TDs who were listed as directors of 40% of B level tournaments in the last year???
HMMM. Even though there are those who would love to continue to believe that all is rosy and there are
not significant geographic voids throughout our federation with very few US Chess rated events, the facts
state clearly otherwise. US Chess simply cannot ignore reality to indulge whatever fantasies.
I thought it was if b1 was under attack, but I thought he did both. I recall a story about a player who had castled kingside, marched his king back to e8, and then castled queenside. He was very confused when he entered the game into Chessbase and it said his move was illegal. Does anyone else remember that story and who the player was?
