2010 Season - rules discussion

There are some suggestions about for rule changes for the 2010 season.  I reserve the right as admin to set the rules as necessary to make the championships work smoothly, but it is a good thing to consider suggestions and requests from the teams.  Ultimately teams will have to agree to the next season's rules before it can begin.

I would like to set a couple of ground rules for the discussion.

This is not the place to discuss any past incidents!  Continuing to hammer on past actions of teams or individuals (actual or suspected) is inappropriate.  It could constitute harassing under the site terms of service.

Any rules for a competition of this type must be verifiable.  It must be possible to determine if the rule is actually violated.  Circumstantial evidence is insufficient.

When possible, settle it on the board.  This is a chess competition, not a "prove your opponents broke a rule" competition.  Maybe we can come up with an element to the tournament that rewards teams that get all the way through without attempting to use the rules as a weapon. 

Ive taken your sticky note into consideration ;-) On a serious note, its great completley agree....

Items for discussion

Player Removals

A suggestion has been made to limit player removals in some way.  The theory (unproven) is that an admin might remove players from a match to obtain an advantage.  There are too many reasons a player might disappear from a match to make a blanket rule (no removing players) work for this one.  For example, a player might close their chess.com account, leave the group, or self-remove for any number of reasons.

I'm not against the idea of requiring "good sportmanship".  However, I think it goes beyond the obvious (unproveable) symptom of players disappearing from matches.  Hypothetically, how about teams who start the season with 100 members and average rating in the 1500's, but finish the year with 500 members and average rating in the 1900's?  If those new players naturally fit in with the team then it makes sense, but what if the admin is just inviting everyone >2000 on the site to try to win the league by sheer numbers?

Instead of just a fixed number of players requirement (currently 5+) should we require / allow admins to balance the teams if the average rating difference is more than some threshold?  For example, an admin should not remove players normally but if the team has more than 300 pt average rating difference it is allowed?  The example originally given was a team that has a lower average might remove low rated to get closer, but we also have the chance a team with the higher average might remove their bottom players to make that advantage even stronger.

Late challenge/accept/lock notifications and penalties.

What can we do to ensure teams / admins are always informed about the match schedule?  Is there anything we can do?

There were several late starts where both teams agreed to continue on the board, even though a forfeit claim would technically be possible.  How do we encourage that.  Do the rules need to be clarified?  I actually got worried that 3rd party teams with a vested interest in seeing a particular team forfeit might raise an issue.

The beating a dead horse rule.

I think it's a serious problem that some individuals just can't let past issues go.  I think behavior of that type warrants some kind of "unsportsmanlike conduct" penalty.  Perhaps the team could be penalized tiebreak points?  Just musing here, got any suggestions?

I've written loads of things, but it was gone away when I pushed ''Submit your comment'' button. What could have happened? Any idea?

I really like one of your proposals. I would allow Team leaders to remove players only when the rating differences where above 300 pts. However, I would force them to copy the removed pairings into the same forum when locking the match. I believe this would avoid those "unfair" differences and we would keep an official rule abouth that subject.

Now that we have a decent number of teams registered, it's time to restart this rules discussion.

I think in terms of numbers here is my suggestion. Some will not like it but like I said its just an idea. Groups register have to be 250 or less and allow them leeway to go up to 280 at any time during the tournament? If they DO go over 280 they have to drop from the tournament? Team admins that agree this rule and stay agree to abide by this?!

My apologies yes 300 seems better :>)

OK, time to get serious about some rules finalization proposals.

Teams which are late on sending the invite, accepting the challenge, or locking the match will incur a 1 game penalty to their score for the match for each day late, up to a maximum of 10 days.  After 10 days of cumulative delay the match may be claimed as a forfeit.  Penalty is by reducing the penalized team's match score, ie if a team scores 20 points in the match but had 5 penalty days, their score is recorded as 15.  A team which scores fewer over the board wins than penalty games would record a negative score for the match.  Penalty points are not recorded as games won by the opposing team, as doing so would double the differential in the score.  This penalty is not automatic, it must be claimed by the opposing team and the opposing team is not obligated to claim the penalty, for example if they prefer to win over the board.  Third parties have no standing in any discussion on timeliness of match starts or the decisions of other groups to invoke or waive penalties.

Team captains are encouraged to negotiate a specific date/time the match will be locked, to avoid spurious claims of unsportsmanlike conduct in managing the team membership.  It would be helpful to post that date/time in the public notes for the match.

Admins should refrain from unfairly manipulating match signups to obtain a rating advantage or eliminate a disadvantage.  If an admin removes players from a match for any reason, it is suggested that a note be published in the public notes for the match indicating what players were removed and an optional reason for the removal.  Some removals are justifiable, for example removing a player who has just timed out many games, who is banned for cheating, etc.

It should be noted by all that players have the ability to remove themselves from a match for any reason.  They may also be removed automatically by ceasing to be a member of the group, or of chess.com.  This is not a competition of conclusion jumping -- do not assume that a player diappearing from a match means the admin removed him/her.

It should be further noted that in some groups there are many admins.  A group's primary TM Championships contact may not have control over actions of other members with admin priviliges in the group.

Each match has a defined ending date.  The score of any undecided matches will be recorded as of that date, and the score at that point in time will be used to determine the result of the match.