Adding delay mid-game

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Apologies to tanstaafl if I’m wasting bandwidth with something that’s already been discussed, but I did search the archives this time to no avail.

Last night at the chess club, an interesting dispute came up. Black (a Local TD) set his Chronos for our usual 30/90, SD/1 time control. After 15 moves, White had used up 60 minutes while Black had used up 40. White (a Senior TD) called me as TD over. It turns out that Black, through an honest mistake, had neglected to put the 5 second delay on the Chronos and White only now had noticed it. Since White was behind on time, he wanted me to add delay now while the position was still a complicated middle game, citing that somewhere in the 5th Edition rules or in Bill Goichberg’s publications it’s considered unsportsmanlike conduct to place a delay-capable clock on a game and not have the delay on. Black, ahead on time, preferred that we didn’t add the delay, since it would negate some of his time advantage, citing that it was already well into the game and the TD (me) didn’t announce that delay should be on at the beginning of this round (round 3 of 5). One compromise was proposed that we add the delay, but Black wanted to subtract 5 minutes from each side while White wanted to subtract only 3 minutes from each side. Ultimately, the compromise of subtracting 4 minutes was rejected by both parties. The written tournament rules were that the 5-second delay was standard, but the club does have analog clocks that are not delay-capable, so it’s understood that delay is an option.

I was vaguely aware of the “unsportsmanlike conduct” opinion, but I didn’t think it was in the 5th Edition rules, a copy of which was NOT available at the tournament. What I did know was that changing from a non-delay clock to a delay clock only happens when someone claims a draw by insufficient losing chances which was not applicable here because both sides had more than 25 minutes left in the FIRST time control and the position was far from drawish. Plus I was aware of the rule that if you’re going to use delay, it should start from move 1 and not just the second time control. I’m just a lowly Club TD with a little dangerous knowledge, so I ruled in Black’s favor that the clock should remain undisturbed and the players should continue playing. White said he was continuing “under protest”.

Black went on to gain a substantial late middlegame advantage, but later (ironically?) blundered in sudden death time trouble to where White was winning. The game ended when White had King, Queen, and 1 Pawn versus Black having only King and 3 Pawns and White claimed insufficient losing chances with 6 seconds left on his clock. Black with 40 seconds on his clock mumbled something to the effect that he would take a draw. Both sides had chances to win the game and both sides might have benefited from having more delay time with White being the last one with a win, but insufficient time to execute it on the board.

If the game starts with a delay-capable clock, but delay is not set, should I have added it at White’s request over Black’s objections? Checking my 5th Edition, I could not find a rule that is directly on point and I could not find the unsportsmanlike conduct opinion. What is the proper ruling?

2

Ernest,

I think you did exactly the right thing.

The main point I would make is that White did not notice the clock was operating with no delay until over 1 1/2 hours had gone by. The game indeed started without the delay on and continued so until time became an issue.

That’s too bad, but White should have insured the clock was operating correctly in the beginning of the game. If, for instance, he would have complained at move 7 or 8 that the problem existed, I am sure Black would have agreed to turning on the delay feature. The understood is that not setting the delay was an error in clock setting, an oversight.

I still think you did the correct thing in having the game continue as is. Interestingly, White’s protest is really that he himself did not catch the error early enough to make a difference. The TD certainly has no responsibility to disrupt a game that is operating smoothly.

3

No. See the “TD Tip” on page 51: “There is no rule allowing players, after a game has started, to ask for a properly set delay clock to be placed on their game, which would replace an analog clock or delay clock not set properly. Only the TD can initiate placing a clock with time delay capabilites on a game after a 14H claim has been made and the steps of 14H2 have been applied.” Your ruling was correct.

4

I don’t mind a this kind of bandwidth use. :slight_smile: (It IS more useful to everyone to use a thread that’s already been started if you have additional questions on the subject, but that’s the reader’s time we’d be saving)

Yes, you probably did the right thing. I’m not sure 14H is the correct rule to reference, though.

Question: From what you said, I’m guessing that 5 minutes WASN’T deducted from the clock at the start of the game. Is that right? If 5 minutes hadn’t been deducted (and if that is the tournament’s standard practice when a delay clock is used) then White really had no excuse for not noticing.

If 5 minutes HAD been deducted from both sides, it would have been reasonable to add that amount back to each player’s clock OR to turn delay on. I don’t have the rule book in front of me, but I saw a reference to rule 16P in another thread (I’m not sure if that should mean only correcting the starting time or making other corrections as well – like delay not being turned on by accident).

5

I agree that 14H is an odd place for it, but that’s where the author chose to put the explicit statement that a player may not request a time-delay clock after the game has started.

16P covers “erroneously set clocks.” If a clock is set for the wrong amount of time, this is obviously erroneous and must be corrected. But setting a digital clock with the delay off is not “erroneous,” it is a legitimate choice by the player. The fact that he chose it out of stupidity rather than reasoned thought does not give him a loophole.

You have a point about the 5-minute deduction, and in such a case the TD should probably restore five minutes to each side. (One of several reasons I don’t use that rule.)

6

I put that TD Tip with 14 H because that is the rule most players like to use when trying to replace a clock.

Rule 16 B can help muddy the waters here:

16B. How to set clocks.

b. Delay: Time delay clocks should be set according to the manufacturer’s directions so that the device used to indicate that a player’s time has been exhausted for all time control periods is activated. Such mechanism may include one or more of a beep, a light, a display of all zeros, or a display of a flag. Players should explain the flag fall mechanism and the clock’s operation to their opponents. The time delay should be set according to the director’s instructions, with the time delay in force starting at move one (5Fb). Clocks equipped to do so should be set for a Bronstein or a delay mode for tournament play. Players are responsible for knowing how to set their own clocks. For more information on delay clocks see Chapter 4, Equipment Standards; 5F, Standard timer for sudden death; 35F5, Special clock; 42B, Signaling devices; 42C, Move counters; 42D, Digital clocks; and 42F, Delay clock preferable in sudden death.

When a delay clock (or any clock) is set wrong one can not expect a good result. I think the solution the TD choose here was just fine. It was as fair as possible. Both players were at fault here; i.e., the non-owner of the clock did not notice for 1.5 hours that the delay was not set? It takes little effort and minor counting ability (thousand-1, thousand-2, …) to look at a delay clock to see if the delay is set.

Tim

7

I understand what you meant here (if time delay is used, it should be used for the entire game, not turned on only for the second time control). However, that’s not exactly what you said. “The time delay should be set according to the director’s instructions, with the time delay in force starting at move one” implies that the use of time delay (if the clock is capable of it) is absolutely required, even if both players don’t want it. I realize that some TDs would like the rule to say that, but it doesn’t.

8

Well, thanks for the support for my ruling, but let me play devil’s advocate and point to the above bolded quote from Tim’s post. Doesn’t this mean that it might be more correct to have ruled the other way? Delay advocates would say that the unfortunate messiness of the end of the game could have been avoided with the “ends justifying the means”.

I’m still hoping to hear from the contingent, if they exist, who regard not setting delay on a delay-capable digital clock as unsportsmanlike deception.

9

I considered that argument, but I think it’s just clumsy wording. A clock with the time delay off is not “improperly set.” This rule should only be applied if, say, the clock were set for 45 minutes instead of 75, or the two sides started with different amounts of time. Deliberately deceiving the opponent is obviously a violation of the rules, but it would be fairly hard prove. (He could just be an idiot.) The only case in which I could see possibly resetting the clocks would be if the player setting it had told his opponent that the time delay was on at the start, and both players apparently believed it.

10

If a director had told the players that they were required to use time delay and they didn’t set the clock that way, then I wouldn’t fault the director for making the players correct the clock.

In fact, now that I’ve actually gone to the rule book and checked 16P, I think that unintentionally leaving off the delay setting (when both players believed that delay was being used, rather than both having decided not to use it intentionally) is an error that is supposed to be fixed. Read the TD tip at the end of 16P and look at some of the types of “errors” that are mentioned – the TYPE of delay, for example. If you’re supposed to correct a clock that’s using the wrong TYPE of delay why not correct the situation where delay was intended to be used and inadvertently omitted?

When the director FIRST ruled on the delay setting, the player wasn’t making a 14H claim. He also wasn’t requesting a delay capable clock be used to replace the current clock. He was asking for an incorrectly set clock to be corrected. So I don’t think 14H applies – 16P seems the correct rule.

If the player had made his request within a few moves of the start of the game I’d be inclined to follow 16P and correct the delay setting. But the bottom line is that he waited too long to make a claim that should have been obvious much earlier in the game. You could even say that waiting that long is an implied agreement to use the clock without delay (and if the 5 minutes was SUPPOSED to have been deducted and WASN’T it should have been REALLY obvious). For this specific situation, I don’t see anything wrong with the TD’s decision.

Of course, I could also be misreading the original post. To split hairs: “Black, through an honest mistake, had neglected to put the 5 second delay on the Chronos” is subject to interpretation. Was the honest mistake that he thought the delay was supposed to be set and didn’t get it set right? Or was the “honest mistake” thinking that the other player was OK with not having a delay? In the second case rule 16P doesn’t apply. With White having waited so long to complain, it’d be hard to say that Black was wrong if that’s what he said happened.

Ethics complaint:
I don’t think an incorrect delay setting should subject a player to an ETHICS complaint unless he did it intentionally and deceived his opponent about it. If that were the case then White might have a reasonable complaint.

11

True, but such an announcement would be a rules variation. We can discuss whether it would be significant enough to require advance notice, but it definitely is not the policy in most tournaments.

I cannot agree with your interpretation here. It seems to hang on the reference in the “TD Tip” to correcting a clock incorrectly set with “Fischer mode” (cumulative addback) instead of delay. Note first that it does not suggest “correcting” from Bronstein to delay. Fischer mode is fundamentally different, and, perhaps more to the point, is non-standard in USCF tournaments. Analog clocks and non-time-delay digital clocks arestandard, and using either of these cannot logically be considered “erroneous.” In any case, this hairsplitting seems pointless, since the language following 14Hd2 is quite clear. A player may not demand a time-delay clock after the start of the game, and the TD should not protect a player from his own incompetence.

This leaves only the case of a player deliberately setting the clock without time delay after his opponent has requested it. There is actually some scope for discussion here, but until someone cites a real-world case I’d just as soon let it lie.

12

Maybe I’m misinterpreting this statement, but it seems to say the delay was supposed to be used.

I just don’t see the applicability of the TD-tip from rule 14H for two reasons:

  1. The player wasn’t making a 14H claim. I’d interpret what the tip said in the CONTEXT of rule 14H and not give it some wider authority.
  2. The player didn’t ask for a new clock (which is what’s mentioned in 14H) but requested that the clock that was being used be corrected since it wasn’t working as he had expected. Again, it depends on the exact circumstances. If both players THOUGHT the clock was set up with delay, then this was an ERROR. The clock wasn’t set correctly.

Rule 16P mentions other errors also – move counter incorrectly set, for example. AFAIK clocks aren’t REQUIRED to have a move counter at all. So if this is an ERROR that can be fixed, why not delay? Again, I think it comes down to the player’s expectations. If they EXPECTED the clock to be working with a time delay, then not having the delay was an ERROR. If they didn’t, then there’s no basis for any claim. It’s difficult to tell for sure from the wording of the original post, but it sounded like they DID expect it to be set for delay. White’s case that this was an error is weakened considerably by waiting so long to make a claim.

rfeditor,
Would you have agreed to change the clock if White had noticed the problem on the second move instead? From the way you’re arguing (universal applicability of rule 14H2d’s TD-TIP, total non-applicability of rule 16P’s TD-tip) it sounds like you wouldn’t allow the change even if the problem was caught right away.

13

  1. 14H: I believe Tim Just already answered this one. He put that under 14H because that’s where most people would look for it. Once the game starts, the clock cannot be replaced unless defective, or or reset unless “erroneously set.” Having the time delay off does not qualify.

  2. I think you’re missing the point about “delay (being) standard.” This just means taht if A has a time-delay clock and B doesn’t, A gets to use his clock. If neither player wants to use delay, I don’t think there are many TDs who would order them to do so. A TD who did would be on shaky ground, though the matter can be debated.

  3. Trying to base your ruling on the players’ subjective expectations is a really bad idea. There are times when you cannot avoid it (did he intend to distract the opponent?), but any TD who does this on a regular basis is asking for trouble. Players are not zombies, and if a player starts the clock with the time delay off, it must be assumed that he was acting volitionally (even if stupidly).

  4. Change after two moves: If both players wanted the change made, of course. If one of the players objected, I would attempt to get them to agree – but, under the rules, the player who objected would be correct. This case really does not differ from that of White pulling out a time-delay clock after two moves and insisting that it be used instead of the BHB on the table. He can’t.

14
15

These quotes have become so deeply nested that I’m having trouble figuring out who said what. However, the rule described above (“… not using time delay negates 14h claims that would normally be allowed on an analogue or non time delay clock”) is a local variation I haven’t heard of before. There is nothing wrong with it, but it is naive to assume that it is in general use.

16

At the beginning of the game I always ask my opponent if he has set the time delay on his clock. A player should be able to rely on his opponent’s word and shouldn’t be penalized if the clock was in fact not set correctly.

In a 40/2, sd/1 time control most digital clocks will not show the seconds until a certain amount of time has lapsed. The clock I use the most is a DGT XL which doesn’t show seconds until the player is down to 20 minutes. As I recall most other clocks don’t show seconds until 10 minutes are remaining. I believe on an Chronos seconds are only shown in certain modes for the entire time control and at 10 minutes in the remaining modes. Therefore it is very difficult, almost impossible, to tell if time delay is running correctly on most clocks. Even with the seconds counting down from the beginning I am not in agreement that the opponent of the clock owner has to observe the time delay functioning correctly if he is relying on the player’s statement.

I am not sure we were given all of the important facts in the example quoted at the beginning of the thread, therefore I am not sure I either agree or disagree with the ruling. Had Black stated at the beginning of the game that time delay was set, then I probably would have ruled to penalize Black and turn the time delay on.

17

John,

I’m not quite sure what you mean by this. Before the first round of my tournaments I habitually say something like “Set your digital clocks for two hours and a ten second increment or delay, set your analog clocks for four o’clock.” This would be for a G/120 + 10 seconds tournament, but are you saying that an announcement like this is non-standard?

Alex Relyea

18

rfeditor,
You keep quoting rule 14H, but this TD-tip doesn’t apply. Nobody was trying to REPLACE a clock. Nobody was making a 14H CLAIM. IT JUST DOESN’T APPLY. Changing a setting on a clock is NOT the same as replacing the clock.

I would say that a written tournament announcement that 5-second delay is standard means that it is SUPPOSED to be used. Why put it in the pre-tournament announcement otherwise? I would say that if the White player made a claim early in the game, it is reasonable to assume that the clock was set INCORRECTLY and not that there was some kind of agreement between the players to ignore the tournament rules. It’s easy to fix the problem and it DOESN’T involve replacing the clock.

White waiting so long to make the claim weakens his case considerably. For a person familiar with that clock, it’s easy to tell whether you have time delay working, but a player not familiar with the clock MIGHT not have noticed for a while. Further complicating things is that after several moves have been made, how much time should be deducted (if any) when time delay is turned on. Since several moves have been made, the players would have used less time with time delay on – so deducting the full 5 minutes leaves them with less time than they should have had. For example, if 30 moves had been made, it would be reasonable to only subtract 2 minutes 30 seconds. The added complications of setting the clock’s time and the fact that White waited so long to have made the claim in the first place makes me think that the best ruling IN THIS CASE was to leave the clocks alone.

19

I recall that in at least one of the modes on the Chronos the only way to tell how many seconds of delay is a flashing “-”. Even if a player can see the seconds count down from the start of the game I don’t see it as an appropriate solution to penalize him. What harm is there in adding the delay when the error is discovered?

20

I think part of this argument goes to defining whether delay is a mandate or something less.

Going back to the intent of Black when he set the clock in the first place, I can’t read people’s minds. During the dispute there was never an accusation that Black deliberately set the clock to trap White. However, Black did not perceive that delay benefit him at that point because “I’ve worked hard to get ahead on the clock.” Black was also under the impression that you always take 5 minutes off when you have delay, so a mind-reader could conclude that he deliberately set the clock with full time and no delay. Was it done with malice? I concluded no. Black probably just disliked time delay and set his clock in defiance of USCF and the tournament rules. I admit that as TD, I did not tell everyone to use delay on this particular night.

White said that he was making his claim with plenty of time, but he was 20 minutes behind his opponent and he admitted he was in some time trouble, needing to make 15 more moves in 30 minutes. White waited until he was behind and in a little trouble before noticing.

After all the above discussions, the compromise proposal was too complicated to wade through at the time. I only run one-game-a-week tournaments and digital clocks are hard enough to set, so I find the variation of subtracting 5 minutes with delay more trouble than it’s worth. I thought about forcefully intervening to add delay and subtract some minutes from each player’s time. It might have been more equitable, but it was also complicated and heavy-handed and likely nobody would be happy if I chose four minutes as the deduction time. I decided against complicated and heavy-handed and hoped that the rule I remembered about not replacing clocks was most applicable to my decision for doing the least I could.

Does Black’s behavior change your mind John?