PDA

View Full Version : should creditation be required by all arbiters



CameronD
08-07-2007, 09:25 PM
Hi

I was national umpire for lawn bowls which required 30 hours of class teaching and a 90% pass mark on a 3 hour exam and practical. Lately they have been concerned about law suits against them for incorrect decisions - will this trend occur in chess as well.

My question is, considering all the arbiter errors reported on chesschat...

1) should Australia have an arbiter course which all arbiters must take and pass (correspondence or person with state association) to arbitate in prizemoney and/or rated games.

2) In regard to rule 10.2... should arbiters have a minumin rating to be able to do their job.

In lawn bowls, everything required accreditation (you cant evan play without a 6 week course (15 hours), I've been playing chess for 2 years and their seems to be no rules on any of these matters.

Igor_Goldenberg
09-07-2007, 10:31 AM
With any accreditation scheme there are many questions as:
1. Accreditation is done by human beings, whose imperfection has to be kept in mind
2. Does accreditation ensure some level of quality?
3. Does it stop people who qualified otherwise but for various reasons can not/do not want to have accreditation

IMHO, voluntary accreditation scheme is not a bad a thing, as long as it's up to organisers to choose whether they require an arbiter to have an accreditation.

eclectic
09-07-2007, 11:40 AM
I sometimes wonder whether all players should take a written test on the laws of chess before being permitted to participate.

If players were required to show they are conversant with such laws it might make the task of arbiters easier.

Just a thought ... :hmm:

Capablanca-Fan
09-07-2007, 11:45 AM
Surely our IAs could be paid to run a small class that would allow other arbiters to be acredited for rated events?

It would be good to have a minimum rating for arbiters when it comes to events that could be decided by 10.2.

Igor_Goldenberg
09-07-2007, 04:08 PM
It would be good to have a minimum rating for arbiters when it comes to events that could be decided by 10.2.
God bless the increment!

eclectic
09-07-2007, 04:17 PM
God bless the increment!

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Capablanca-Fan
09-07-2007, 04:56 PM
Logan CC has adopted the increment to avoid 10.2! :hand:

Garvinator
09-07-2007, 05:12 PM
Logan CC has adopted the increment to avoid 10.2! :hand:
Will this include the Day of Knights tournament next year?

Denis_Jessop
09-07-2007, 09:08 PM
A few brief comments. largely for information.

1. A properly run and structured arbiters course would require a good deal of work and there is also the question, mentioned by Igor, of the qualifications of those who run the course. The matter is not insurmountable but careful preparation would be needed.

2. A few times in the past IAs Gary Bekker and Charles Zworestine have run short arbiters seminars/training courses (I think in Sydney and Brisbane) though I have no feedback on them.

3. FIDE runs Arbiters courses at its various places of instruction, eg Singapore. Also there was one run at the GibTelecom Masters last January in Gibraltar. A nice holiday if you can afford it!

DJ

Capablanca-Fan
09-07-2007, 11:06 PM
Will this include the Day of Knights tournament next year?
I would support that. Would you prefer this as arbiter? Did you have to make any decisions under this rule?

Garvinator
09-07-2007, 11:11 PM
I would support that. Would you prefer this as arbiter? Did you have to make any decisions under this rule?
Only a couple and they weren't serious claims ie players were only attempting to avoid losing on time. One claim came while the players were still in the middle game.

Basically I will support any time control that avoids a guillotine finish. I would prefer to have 15/5 instead of 20/0.

A time control we don't see anything of in Australia, but seems to be common place in USA is Bronstein/time delay. I think it could have its place in rapid tournaments and maybe even in weekenders that use 60/10 and four rounds in a day.

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2007, 11:56 PM
Successful application of 10.2 is more about grasping the concept correctly than a rating. I would rather have a 10.2 in one of my games arbited by a 1200 player who grasped the concept than a GM who did not. However it is best to use small increments if possible and eliminate the issue altogether. (Thus far I have not yet been all that tempted to push this concept to the ultimate and run an event at the time control G60+1 second :D )

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2007, 12:08 AM
It should be noted there is no minimum rating requirement for the FIDE arbiter titles of FA or IA.