In 5F of the 6th edition of the rulebook it says “A delay clock (a clock with time delay or add-back capabilities) is the standard timer for sudden death time controls. This clock allows games to be decided entirely by the players (14H5), with no need for directors to consider insufficient losing chances (14H) or count for the 50-move rule (14F4).” However, rule 14F, the 50-move rule, makes no mention of there being different procedures in sudden death time pressure based on if there is delay on the clock.
14F4. (f) covers this scenario, although I believe 5F could be updated so as to avoid the misinterpretation that a delay clock (absent a move-counter) could be used to nullify the 50-move draw rule, which has nothing to do with delay.
5F simply needs to be updated to reflect that the clock needs to have the move counter in order to keep a director from having to count moves.
Again, the 50-move rule doesn’t nullify 14F. The 50-move rule.
Move counters suck, especially in time scrambles. As a disabled player who enjoys playing blitz games, I can tell you horror stories about not pressing the clock fast enough.
This scenario is similar to a player who forgets to press the clock, while his opponent doesn’t notice (or chooses not to say anything).
I can’t believe any rule would consider a move counter to be evidence of a 50 count.
Michael Aigner
I can promise I’ll never vote in favor of such a rule.
What Boyd said! Given the large number of TDs among the Delegates, I feel fairly confident that no rule endorsing move counters as evidence of anything will get approved any time soon.
Remember the move counters on some of the old BHB clocks? If you hit them hard enough, they could jump moves ahead. Sometimes they would just get stuck and not move at all. Players forget to hit the buttons on their clock, whether it be analog of digital. Sometimes the players make several moves with neither hitting the clock button or touch device. As a TD I have seen that happen on many occasions. Thus, the bias against using move counters to determine the 50 move rule or much of anything else.
Indeed - relying on a move counter is a non-starter. They are only as reliable as 1) they are and 2) as the operator allows them to be. I have seen clocks pushed several times in one move pair as the players try to sort stuff out.
Well, then why do we have 14F4 f, which states a director may insert a clock with a move counter? As far as I can tell, the rule already exists!
Surely, you don’t think that TDs apply all of the stinking rules all of the time? That is what the rule on TD discretion is for.
Doesn’t answer my question.
First, I will preface my remarks by stating that I am as opposed as one can possibly be to using a clock press counter to determine whether players have met the time control or to “add time” for a subsequent time control to the clock.
I personally have no problem with applying rule 14F4f to handle a request for the director to count moves for a 50-move rule claim in time pressure.
The text of the rule in question:
I would not use this as my primary means of handling such a situation. I think it is preferable for the director or a deputy to be physically present and counting moves. However, the world does not always allow us to work in ideal circumstances. If it is not feasible to have a TD or deputy dedicated to the task of counting moves, I see this as a reasonable alternative.
Do not overlook the sentence that if the count is incorrect, the players should stop the clock and notify the director.
Regarding the above, bolded, Absolutely!
I’m well aware of the problems of move-counters, and care must be taken. I, too, am opposed to relying on the move counter, but as Ken said, above, situations arise where nobody is available to count moves; as a last resort, then, we can legally use them. I would do so, however, absent a reasonably accurate score sheet, only upon a claim/request by one or both of the players. That is to say that I wouldn’t necessarily rely upon them from move 1.
My reply to OP was simply to clarify that move counters could legally be used since he thought that there was no reference to them in rule 14F.
I didn’t say there was such a provision - I just said I would not rely on a move counter. Period. I have seen them messed up far too many times to rely on that to end a game.
It wouldn’t – or, at least, shouldn’t.
However, a move counter can be an immense aid to a TD who is counting moves. It is all too easy for the TD to lose count, especially if other players are tapping the TD on the shoulder because they have some kind of a problem at their own boards.
A TD who is observing the game can keep a close eye on the game, to keep track of forgotten clock presses and other irregularities, and make a mental note of how many moves off the counter is.
Bill Smythe
I suppose I played enough chess to run into every rule. Recently had a K vs. KB&N. Both players very short of time
both playing on inc. No score being kept. TD had to count the moves. I suppose if no TD is avail you can use the “no
progress” fall back
And what, pray tell, is the “no progress” fall back?
Alex Relyea