One Section Events

Author: Larry Eldridge

December 1998

Note: This document was prepared just after the completion of the Stan Crowe Memorial which ended December 1st, 1998. The Stan Crowe was a one section, five round event with 72 players. Accelerated Pairings were used for pairing the event.

I. One section events

A. Should we continue to have one-section events? NO! Anyone can always play up, so the argument that one-section events give lower-rated players a chance to play the "iron" or to go for titles is fallacious. They always have that chance.

B. If the membership feels otherwise, and we are going to keep one-section events, I think there should only be one at most.

C. Furthermore, any one-section event should be six rounds, which are really needed, as we have just seen.

D. In this connection, I saw a reference that the Stan Crowe will continue to be a one-section event and will continue to be five rounds. I want this up for discussion too, since I think these are bad ideas, as follows:

1. Five-round tournaments are not good; they have built-in color problems for anyone who plays the entire tournament. People who take a bye get even color distributions, while those who play all their games don't. It should be the other way around. Our format should favor those who play every game, while those who take byes should be willing to take the consequences (half the time, of course, those consequences will be good; it's just a matter of principle that proper color distribution should go to those who play the whole tournament).

2. Single-section tournaments are also not good, as I have discussed.

3. Therefore, I think the Stan Crowe should be changed to a six-round, two-section tournament. Or a six-round, one-section tournament if the membership insists on one one-section tournament a year. Or even a five-round, two-section tournament if that is the best we can get. But not a five-round, one section tournament, which is the worst of both worlds, as we have just seen!