A friend of mine is running tournaments with a time control of “40/25, SD/10+5”. (Each player has 25 minutes to complete 40 moves, then 10 additional minutes are added at move 41. You get 5 additional seconds per move after move 40.) Increment applies only after move 40.
What do you think about this time control?
What clocks support this? If players come with clocks that don’t support this, how are those clocks set? The time control itself is just something that some will like and some will not. The clocks are a practical issue for the on-site TD.
What do you think about this time control?
He probably thinks ~37 seconds per move is reasonable, for the first 40 moves. 
Might as well play 2/1 until someone wins.
I think it’s unratable.
Alex Relyea
I asked you first
Why?
How old are you? Five? You ask a vague question which doesn’t indicate in the slightest what concerns (if any) you have about this.
You have to be at least 16 to post on the Forum.
Perhaps I don’t have any concerns and was just curious what others thought about the time control since it’s an unusual time control.
Thank you for admitting that, as with many of your questions, you really have no interest in the answers.
?
I said “I asked you first” (meaning I’m curious what your opinion is) and also said I am curious what others think about this time control.
I’ve been informed that I am likely wrong above. In that case, I think it should be unratable.
Alex Relyea
It stinks.
As a player, I would not enter an event with this time control. As an organizer, I would not set up an event with this time control.
The first time control, in particular, is unappealing to me. Less than 40 seconds a move for a primary time control, with no increment/delay? What’s the point? But hey, if players want to play it, go for it.
That said, I think the OP should clearly state whether he has an opinion, and if so, what it is. That would help frame the discussion.
It’s ratable, but it sucks.
It will be rated as though the increment applies from move 1. (I think.) 25+5 = 30, which makes it regular-ratable. Not sure if it’s also quick-ratable (dual-ratable). It may not be, because of the presence of a second time control segment.
The proper way to write this control is 40/25 inc/0; SD/10 inc/5. If the increment or delay changes from one time control segment to the next, the increment or delay must be specified for each segment. Plus, if there is a segment with zero increment, that segment must be specified as d/0 (or, in this case, inc/0 since the other segment uses increment).
Now to the second part of my answer. It sucks for a whole boatload of reasons. First, some clocks may not be capable of being set with increment only in the final control.
Second, even if the clock can do it, the behavior may vary from clock to clock. On some clocks, the second segment may be deemed to begin (for each player) when the first segment is used up. Thus if, for example, white uses up his first segment at move 42 while black uses up his at move 56, then for 14 moves (43 through 56) white will have a 5-second increment but black will not.
Or, if the clock is counting moves, the second segment may be deemed to begin for both players after black plays his 40th move. This method can cause problems if the move counter becomes inaccurate (e.g. if one of the players forgets to press his clock somewhere along the way).
Third, the “feel” of the time control would vary hugely from the first segment to the second. Most players by now are accustomed to having increment or delay throughout the game. One of your players may lose by time forfeit not realizing that the increment doesn’t begin until move 41. This will result in arguments and hard feelings all the way around.
Fourth, there would likely be old-style time scrambles near the end of the first control, with its accompanying typical misbehavior – using two hands, knocking over pieces and not replacing them, etc – and the extra noise this will create for other games being played in the vicinity.
Don’t do it.
Even FIDE has (apparently) given up on this idea. I have been told that, for a time, a few GMs objected to having increment in the first segment, for reasons which are beyond my comprehension. The latest version of FIDE rules appears to strongly endorse having the increment begin at move 1, the same recommendation USCF has been stating for years.
Bill Smythe
Wait, are we allowed to say it sucks?
If so, I revise my answer above. It sucks.
Before SD, the minimum TC was a minute a move with (if I remember correctly) at least 30 minutes in a time control segment. While that’s no longer in force (for regular rating), that’s still not an unreasonable standard for any non-sudden death TC, and this fails both (i.e., it sucks). It sound almost like a test of one’s ability to set a clock to weird time controls rather than a serious TC for a tournament.
The originator of this post states that a friend of his is already running tournaments with this bizarre time control. I would be interested to know from this friend why he/she decided to do this in the first place, and what the response from the local chess community has been.
Actually, everyone that posted an opinion on that time control does not like it.
I would not play a game in that time control and I would not direct such a time control tournament like that either.
Micah, what do you think about that time control?
This seems to be “quick” version of the time control used in the current grand chess tour. They also have no increment in the first time control. But, at least they have 2 hours. It does make for an interesting dynamic with a big time scramble near move 40.
For the “quick” version, I suppose whether you like it or not depends on how much you like quick chess vs longer lengths. It seems to me most prefer either blitz or long games. Not as many like the intermediate. If you’re in the camp that prefers short, but not blitz, games, then I suppose this provides an interesting variation. Otherwise, I’d doubt you’d like it.
The biggest problem I see is that you are really relying on the move counter to be accurate. In a long game it’s easier to verify.
Have any of these tournaments been rated, USCF or otherwise? It would be interesting to see how many players competed under these severe conditions. For a first time control, anything less than one minute per move of thinking time is pretty harsh on the players.
I remember playing in 30/30 tournaments, that is, 30 moves in 30 minutes with a repeating 30 move in 30 minute time controls. Rarely did anyone get to a third session. The tournaments ran from noon to about 6 pm, which gave plenty of time to get ready for the evening blitz tournament at 7 pm. None of it was rated though. It was just for fun and practice. So-called “serious tournaments” required at least two minutes per move of thinking time in each session. Modern tournaments with only a 30 minute second or final session with either increment or delay would have been looked at as unacceptable for quality play.