Next Tournament

I'll only play if someone else will pay for my rating points!?

There was an interesting thread that was started commenting on our tournament calender. I was asked to bring more attention to it. It would be enlightening to find out what each of our member's view is on this matter.
The thread begins at:


  1. It is good that there are all those tournaments. I just hope that many more players will come. This is great opportunity for all players who like competition, wether USCF members or not, especially in free for all. It is good for promoting chess. We know who absorbs costs of running this kind of rated events, and we, the chessplayers, are gratfull to you, chessdoctor. May the Lord continue to bless you, as He always does.
    I know that higher rated players will not play in free for all tournaments, because of real possibility to lose their rating points. Any master or higher could only lose rating and not gain anything, unless there are a few of them at the same tournament, so they play each other.

  2. With regard to me, I only have about 30 over the board games so far at tournament level. So more chess can only increase my tournament experience. So tournamnets like these are very good. From the ratings perspective, its true(in my case) that with only one or two high rated players in the tournament, in a round of 4 games, 3 wins against lower rated players and 1 loss to higher rated does results in overall decrease of my rating. But in terms of my priorities now, it is in the order
    1)More chess

  3. All in all, with the weather the way it was, and the fact that the event was held in the evening, which likely limited the number of junior members from playing, I was pleased with the turnout. 15 in the rated section and 6 in the unrated. Certainly we could do better and I expect that the April and May events will have a better turnout.

    As I said before this is a "novelty" to see if the entry fee is a limiting factor in participation.

    One option to encourage other stronger players, who may be protecting his/her rating points to participate, would be to have more sections, like a quad format. For example:

    Double Round Robin Sections Could have been
    2050, 1853, 1750
    1624, 1545, 1526
    1170, 1116, 1107
    1087, 1065, 988
    879, 802, 520
    And instead of a bye do a cross over sectional game

    Or to do accelerated pairings in the early round. This would avoid, the large disparity in the ratings of early round matches.For example: Round 1 accelerated match ups would have been:
    2050 vs. 1624
    1545 vs. 1853
    1750 vs. 1526
    1116 vs. 1170
    1107 vs. 988
    879 vs. 1087
    1065 vs. 802