Right to Earn a Rating

As always, opinions are my own, not those of Lichess.org.

To compete in US Chess events, one both needs to pay membership fees and to pay entry fees, in addition to being a member in good standing (e.g., not have assaulted other players). According to US Chess, being an adult member (at $54/year) confers benefits:

• Play official US Chess rated games, online or in person, for national and local events.
• Recognition for your performance across age, gender, and game categories in our Top 100 lists.
• Opportunities to improve as a player, chess organizer, coach, or tournament director through webinars and official certifications.
• Voting Rights in US Chess Elections; participate in governance and have your say in the future of chess in America.
• Digital access to Chess Life and Chess Life Kids, our award-winning magazines.
• Print editions of Chess Life and/or Chess Life Kids (opt-in fees apply).
• Helping us grow the game in America and worldwide!

That's right, non-members cannot purchase Chess Life or improve through webinars and their certifications, nor appear on age-based and gender-based Top 100 lists! And god forbid you grow the game in America and worldwide in an unofficial capacity...

Some states have a thriving competitive chess scene, with convenient access to 1-day, 2-day, and longer events. Players also frequently travel across state lines, reserving hotel rooms to play in open events, with listings such as (condensed):

Prizes: National Champion Title, 33 valuable trophies
Entry Fee: $69 online by April 3rd, $79 online by April 15th, $99 after that or onsite

Large open events feature large cash prizes to attract competition, and may offer class or rating category prizes to encourage competition for players of all skill levels (which of course encourages sandbagging to try to game the system). Prestigious events charge entry fees over $200. Whether you're wanting to play those or to play local events, you'll still need to purchase and carry your own equipment! At larger events, you may need to guard your digital clock...

Familiarity with nuances of US Chess rules may confer a competitive advantage, despite the best intentions of fellow players as well as hard-working tournament directors. This has improved over time, with US Chess freely distributing relevant sections of the 294-page rule book, and rules being revised to be easier to understand (and penalties often starting from a warning). Regardless, learning competition rules (which may vary from event to event) is another investment; you'll want to know how to pause the chess clock (and each opponent might have a different kind of clock) if and when you are aware that rules are being broken.

In my competition career, multiple times I didn't get the game I traveled and paid for (either my opponent no-showed, or the tournament director made an error). Of course TDs do the best they can to accommodate, but mistakes can happen.

A quick side note: it is in the general interest of players and organizations alike that players freely have the right to earn a rating by submitting game scores to a distributed database (a blockchain). Ratings allow organizers to generate pairings and to award rating-based or category-based prizes, and players who have confidence in a robust rating system are more likely to compete in rated events. On the other hand, due to loss aversion players who invest in an annual or longer membership are also more likely to compete in rated events, until their membership expires; so what incentive does US Chess have to innovate?

(Around 2000 US Chess Live connected players around the world to freely play games online. Some tournaments could charge money and allow players to earn an official rating. I once even earned a few dollars playing a Friday Night Blitz event! Years after I started to volunteer for the site, this software would be sold to ICC. US Chess Live was innovative but at a great expense and with other problems.)

Mistakes can happen... mistakes treated as externalities. Were there a players' union or a competing national chess organization, perhaps victims could have a "say in the future of chess in America" and less "recognition for your performance." Instead, we are met with news:

Over the last three years, US Chess was fortunate with more sponsored and endowed events and programs. Although the financial reports stated yearly surpluses, the operational side of the ledger faced challenges from rising costs in the economy...
Budget forecasts indicate the increase in entry fees and membership dues leaves operations with a full staff and returns balance between mission costs and revenues in the next two years.

-- Chuck Unruh, finance VP at US Chess

I respect the hard work of many volunteers and local tournament directors, and unaffiliated teachers and event organizers who help promote the game and a safe, welcoming space for new players as I have. Even so, even at my own career opportunity expense and perhaps at the expense of my friendships I cannot support a morally corrupt organization, let alone one that gouges its members while claiming nonprofit status. Yes, a national organization is necessary to confer NM and WNM titles, but to grow the game in America and worldwide it would be useful to have a distributed games database players can freely submit to (and TDs can build a network of TDs/games they trust when they compute their own personal rating list; let consensus form organically, and do not require membership to earn a rating).

Players can already record moves using pencil and paper; sure, it is beneficial to allow event organizers to provide DGT broadcast boards, but not all problems require complex solutions (while certifying manufacturers whose goods are promoted and sold by US Chess Sales). Incidentally, those rules require, "The device is capable of holding a charge with sufficient battery life to run for at least 6 consecutive hours," but surely players who travel have played G/45 or G/60 events which last 6 hours... players use devices at their own risk, and opponents and tournament directors will have to deal with situations which could have been avoided. Perhaps someday an entire room of chess games could be simultaneously notated and published by a simple webcam... but where is the profit in that?

About creating a more democratic rating system, the URS team do not accept my OTB match games or return my messages. Their FAQ page indicates:

For the initial rating list, only over-the-board tournament games that were rated by FIDE within the last 6 years have been accounted for. Moving forward, we will shortly be developing a system whereby registered tournament organizers can submit the results of their events.

---

Image credit: De an Sun