A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Lets Use the Old System



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 3rd 03, 05:34 PM
ComputerlessBrother
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Lets Use the Old System

In a recent post it was asked why the USCF had seperate fees for TLAs
and for Rating Fees. Maybe we should go back to the old system where
there was (usually) only one fee for both the TLA and the rating fee.

For those who do not remember that far back at one time the USCF had a
system whereby the cost of the TLA was included as part of the rating
fee. Depending on the size of the TLA there would be a minimum set
for the rating fee for an event. It should be noted that part of this
system include 6 free TLAs of up to six lines for each affiliate in a
year. These "Free" TLAs had a minimum rating of $5, the current
minimum fee. Of course this was way back in the 70s.

This system was supposedly abandoned because organizers and clubs
complained about being unable to even remotely estimate costs in
advance of scheduling a tournament. As a result the USCF seperated
out the costs of TLAs from the cost of Rating Fees. In this process
the USCF determined that the 6 free TLA should be discontinued.

Up until the DeFeis TLA debacle the average Chess Life had about 300
TLAs in an issue, without counting Grand Prix events. Since that
time, even after reinstating TLA fees at the old rate, the average
Chess Life has had a little over 100 [non-Grand Prix] TLAs in an
issue. It is interesting if you randomly audit Chess Life TLAs during
any of the 3 periods of seperated fees. You will find that in all 3
cases 50% or more of the TLAs are 6 lines or less, and that 75% of the
TLAs are 8 lines or less. [Yes I actually physically counted TLAs in a
couple of Chess Life issues. I did not include TLAs for National
events, I did not count Grand Prix events, and I didn't count 1 line
TLAs that made reference to another TLA.]

Please note that currently the minimum rating fee is $5, and that a
TLA of 6 lines would cost $12, for a total of $17. We could back to
the old system with TLA actually costed out as part of the rating fee,
but then we would need to develop a sliding scale of minimum fees
based on not just the size of the TLA, but also on the size of a
tournament.

You could leave the standard non-TLA tournament with a $5 minimum
rating fee. For tourmanents with a TLA of 6 lines or less you could
have a $20 minimum rating fee. As this represents an increase I would
also suggest that each affiliate in a calender year be charged a $10
minimum for a TLA of 6 lines or less. This would be to encourage
those clubs and organizers who only run 1 small event a year.

For tournaments with TLAs of 7-10 lines the minimum rating fee could
be $45.

For tournaments with TLAs of over 10 lines I would suggest that the
number of players also be a factor. So a possible set of fees could
be 10+ TLA lines for a tournament under 100 players $70, 100-150
players $90, 151-200 players $120, 201-250 players $150, 251-300
players $200, 0ver 300 players $300.

These are just some rough numbers I have thrown out, they can
obviously be reworked in better formulas. The point would be that the
organizer or club would have a clear idea what the possible set fees
would be for running a tournament.

I am not saying that the current system is not workable and cannot be
made to make a profit. What I have done is given an example of a
different system for TLAs and Rating Fees that could possibly be used.

Personally I believe it is more important for the USCF to be able to
receive tournament reports via the internet, than what the fees should
be for TLAs and rating fees. One year at the delegates meeting I even
made a motion to censure the Executive Board for failing to carry out
a motion from the previous year to do just that.

Lawrence Cohen
Illinois Delegate
  #2  
Old August 3rd 03, 05:50 PM
StanB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Lets Use the Old System


"ComputerlessBrother" wrote in message
om...

I am not saying that the current system is not workable and cannot be
made to make a profit. What I have done is given an example of a
different system for TLAs and Rating Fees that could possibly be used.


You have a lot of good ideas in your post. One thing that should happen is
for the USCF to cover or make a profit on the ratings service. First, they
should cost it out and then set a fee at 150% of the cost. Second, if the
resulting fee would generate price resistance, the costs should be reduced.
Probably through streamlining and modernization. Third, they should charge
the price and ignore all the whining from the scholastics folks. Either we
all pay our way or we do without.

StanB


  #3  
Old August 3rd 03, 06:10 PM
Kenneth Sloan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Lets Use the Old System

"StanB" writes:

"ComputerlessBrother" wrote in message
om...

I am not saying that the current system is not workable and cannot be
made to make a profit. What I have done is given an example of a
different system for TLAs and Rating Fees that could possibly be used.


You have a lot of good ideas in your post. One thing that should happen is
for the USCF to cover or make a profit on the ratings service.
...


A good start would be to compute ratings correctly. Right now, events
are not being rated in a timely fashion, and even when they are rated,
the ratings are being computed incorrectly.


--
Kenneth Sloan
Computer and Information Sciences (205) 934-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX (205) 934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
http://www.cis.uab.edu/info/faculty/sloan/
  #4  
Old August 3rd 03, 06:54 PM
ASCACHESS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Lets Use the Old System

A good start would be to compute ratings correctly. Right now, events
are not being rated in a timely fashion, and even when they are rated,
the ratings are being computed incorrectly.


Kenneth Sloan


But we've always done it that way :-P

Rp
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
new attacking system Sandy Breon rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 7 March 9th 04 03:06 PM
Full Detailed Tech Specs on the "Intel four-way system" being used today? Scott rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 1 November 11th 03 06:22 PM
Chessbase new Media system with Fritz8 Henri H. Arsenault rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 October 18th 03 01:42 PM
What is the Meran System????? Dino Saure rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 3 September 16th 03 11:59 AM
Botvinnik system Jacob Nielsen rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 August 28th 03 05:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.