I’ve never had this happen, but if it should I’m wondering what the USCF stance on it would be.
Say a player in a rated tournament wants to use his cell phone or android tablet or for that matter small laptop PC as a chess clock. There are tons of apps out there that do this, a lot of them free.
I’ve allowed this in some recent tournaments where no other clock was available. It would be hard to cheat with the cell phone or tablet out there in plain sight.
Since they are not approved devices I think you can deny it if you wish to do so. Problems I see are the opponent not knowing how to operate it and you not know if it actually works correctly.
True. I’ve only allowed it in games where the opponent didn’t object.
My general approach with such things is that I’ll allow it with with prior opponent consent in a small, local event. In a larger event, I won’t allow it. This is probably something that should be addressed fairly soon - especially now that wearable technology that interfaces with tables and smartphones is now out in the marketplace.
Do we have an official list of approved chess clocks? I was thinking we just had an approval order. And in that order an android device with delay would be higher than the analog clock with no delay.
+1 on this question. “Approved Electronic Device” doesn’t apply to chess clocks, only scoresheets.
Completely agree that a smart phone app with delay should rank higher than an electronic clock with no delay, or an analog. I have reservations on Boyd’s “small local” limitation; feels right but the definition is too fuzzy right now for me to completely disallow the idea in larger events.
If the app is the only available option I could be comfortable using it anytime with four conditions.
(1) The device is in airplane mode or some other non-connected mode; no wifi, 3G, 4G, LTE, or other connection
(2) The device screen will stay on and visible the entire game; no sleep mode after 5min etc.
(3) The time is configurable like any other chess clock for claims
(4) The owner shows the opponent how to stop the clock for claims and demonstrates that delay or increment is working
Notice I don’t care about the opponent’s consent. If that is the only device available for delay/increment the opponent has no recourse or option. The opponent can bring his/her own clock next time.
Obviously, the current rules don’t account for using electronic devices not solely designed for timekeeping as clocks. This is a relatively recent development.
However, the idea that tablets or cell phones are not approved devices for timekeeping is, IMO, correct - because they’re essentially not approved for anything else. As previously mentioned, wearable technology that can interface with such devices makes their use questionable, especially in larger events with significant prizes and/or titles on the line. People tend to get paranoid in bigger tournaments. In local events, where everyone is more likely to know everyone and folks are more easygoing about this, I don’t worry about it. The definition of “large” versus “small” is a bit fuzzy.
At any tournament I run, I announce that such devices are prohibited in the playing hall before the first round. This means that I don’t have this problem. 
However, it would be good for USCF to address the issue.
A number of years back our club donated our old analog clocks to the local collage club.
Now adays it would be easy enough for them to use chess apps on various devices. Which would mean that they would become accustomed to them etc. Some of these chess apps have been around for a long time. I remember chess clocks for the palm devices way back when. I actually am kind of surprised that this issue has never actually occured before.
One of the major disadvantages of course for the users is that it would be difficult to see who was on the move from afar.
Another disadvantage would be battery life which has gotten better.
I’ve had players ask about using clock apps for a few years now. It just hasn’t been proactively addressed, I think. Rules are often slow to catch up to evolving technology.
Wait until they design the app that senses motion, Takes a photo of the position, translates it into PGN and automatically keeps score. 
along with being a chess clock.
That was actually suggested by someone a few years ago, one of the issues was that there would have to be some kind of rod sticking up with a camera on it high enough to get a reasonable shot of the board, and that might get in the way.
No, no, no, no, no. You use a rod hanging down from the ceiling. It would be a bit difficult in ballrooms with high ceilings.
You wouldn’t have to have much height, just a small mirror on the other side of the board.
I agree there could be a very simple declaration on the issue that would clear things up.
I can see where a phone-based clock app could be disallowed under 20N and could accept that as a player. It’s the letter of the law. As a TD I think it’s ridiculous to disallow it if the aforementioned 4 conditions can be fulfilled, which matches well with Boyd’s “small/local” event consideration.
The iPod Touch is an example device where a TD would have to do the work to verify the clock acts within the clock standards. Maybe the only grey area–I know little about Android devices. iPod Touch is not necessarily a communications device so cannot be immediately disallowed under 20N. The work is reviewing what texting/voip apps exist on the device (if any), verifying it will act within clock rules, and approving it if no irregularities are found. Suspicion or fear is not a valid reason to prevent its use, although realistically many TDs will create their own blanket policies just to feel like their life is easier.
A TD who doesn’t understand certain technology not specifically permitted by the rules, and has concerns about it, is well within his rights to not permit its use. While this does make a director’s life easier, generally speaking, I strongly suspect the majority of TDs are just trying to run a fair event for everyone. The only way for a TD to truly make his life easier is to not be a TD.
I don’t personally have a problem with verifying that a wireless device has been properly disabled for use at a chess tournament. However, there are a lot of TDs who are not familiar with how such devices work. Said familiarity is not now, and has never been, a requirement for TDs. I don’t foresee USCF making such familiarity a requirement any time in the near future (whether it should is a different matter). So, a TD who is not comfortable with such equipment probably should disallow its use.
I have seen a couple of these phone clock apps. The player demonstrated it to me. It seemed to work fine, but I have to wonder why a player would want his phone to be bashed the way many digital clocks are during time pressure. Phones can be sturdy but not that sturdy. In addition, what does the player do when the phone beeps telling him that power is low and needs recharged? This was a problem with one of the devices I saw used. It went dark.
Because the phones are small, they are easy to bump, move, spin, or fall off the table. The tablets that have this app and a touch sensory mode are quite sensitive. Hit them hard and they can sustain damage. One of the things that I did not like is that they are flat. While some have larger numbers and are easy to read, you still have to lean over to see the time. Also, you cannot see if your time is running if you leave the board.
Realize I’m not talking just phones. There are tablets. I have an small acer windows laptop etc. And it wouldn’t be that difficult to manufacture a cradle to hold the smaller devices to make them more stable.
I saw one device with a special holder to hold the phone to keep it stable. Seemed like a whole lot of extra work and money to use one electronic device where another one, a digital clock, was better designed for the job. Unless you are gently touching the screen on a tablet, it can be damaged. How many players are gentle with clocks when in time pressure?
I’ve toyed with the idea of writing a chess clock app that would be designed for use with a special rocking holder. The idea would be that instead of hitting a software button on the phone face, you toggle the rocker. The advantages of this:
• less risk of damaging the phone in time trouble
• it would hold the phone up so you can more easily read the times
• you would be able to tell which clock was running from a distance and from behind
I believe that some early mechanical clocks worked this way. They had two clocks on a rocker, with the clocks designed so that they would only run when level. When you made your move, you pushed the rocker, which lowered and slightly tilted your clock to stop it, and raised and leveled the other clock to start it.
An 1883 Fattorini & Sons clock with that design was used in the 2011 Sherlock Holmes movie with Robert Downey Jr.