Delay vs Increment

Running Chess Tournaments
1

What is the position regarding delay vs increment? I know that there are some clocks that can do either, and many tournaments in my area advertise a time control of, for example, G/120 + 10 sec. which imply that increment is preferred.

I think that there are three basic types; standard delay, non-cumulative increment, and cumulative increment. I know that, for example, the Phileon clock only can do the third, but I’m wondering if any of these can be used without being considered a major rules variation.

Alex Relyea

2

Let’s see if I got your question right.

Standard delay:
The standard clock in games with sudden death time control is a clock with “delay”.
That is a clock that waits for a period of time (standard is 5 seconds) before the clock starts “running” or counting down. No time is added if the move is made before the delay portion ends.

non-cumulative increment:
This is also considered standard.
The so-called “Bronstein” mode on some clocks, though appears different, is in fact the same. In that mode any time used is “added back” up to the set increment. That is, if less than five seconds is used, the time used is added back after the move so that the time displayed already has the five second delay on it. The clock starts immediately.

Cumulative increment:
The “Fisher” mode or time increment mode is NOT standard. That is the type of clock where a player can, in fact, gain time accumulated. If the increment is set to 5 seconds, the full 5 seconds is added to a players’ time regardless of the actual time used. (eg if 3 seconds used the player actually gains 2 seconds)
Using this mode is a major rules variation, and must be clearly announced in the publicity of the tournament in order to be legally used.

3

I prefer the term “non-cumulative addback” to “non-cumulative increment”, since the word “increment” by itself is often used to mean “cumulative addback”.

Non-cumulative addback is also called Bronstein or Adagio, and is mathematically equivalent to a “true” delay. Some players, however, find non-cumulative addback confusing, to the point where a few organizers have declared that a clock with “true” delay is preferable to one with non-cumulative addback.

Cumulative addback, or increment, is another horse entirely. This mode should be used in the USA only if it is explicitly announced in pre-tournament publicity.

I’m not sure what “G/120 + 10 sec” means. It’s not obvious whether the organizer intended a delay (non-cumulative) or an increment.

Since more than a few organizers are now using (cumulative) increment, I think it’s time for the rules committee (or the publications department) to develop some standard abbreviations for TLAs. I’d suggest:

d/n for a delay of n seconds
inc/n for an increment of n seconds

For example, the TLA could announce G/90 d/5 for game in 90 minutes with a 5-second delay, or G/90 inc/30 for game in 90 minutes with a 30-second increment.

Of course, G/90 d/5 could be announced as simply G/90, since a 5-second delay is the default. An organizer who wants to use a different delay, such as 7 seconds, could announce G/90 d/7. Or, if (heaven forbid) somebody wants to run a tournament without the delay at all, he could advertise G/90 d/0 in order to comply with the requirement that, if delay is not to be used, this fact must be announced in all pre-tournament publicity.

There is already a standard abbreviation for delay, but unfortunately it is “td/n” rather than just “d/n”. It’s time to get rid of the atrociously redundant phrase “time delay”. What other kind of delay is there? Height delay? Weight delay? Just “delay” alone is sufficient.

Even more important, though, there is apparently no standard TLA abbreviation for (cumulative) increment. It’s time to correct this, so that organizers who wish to use this option have an easy way of doing so. Cumulative increment, rather than delay, is standard in most of the chess world outside the USA.

See the old thread, “Pave the way for increment”, for additional harangues along these lines.

Bill Smythe

4

So what does that mean for those of us who have Phileon clocks, or any clock that only has the Fischer mode?

Alex Relyea

5

Alex, if your clock only has Fischer mode then you are set for FIDE time controls or for USCF non-delay time controls (after setting the increment to zero). For USCF tournaments you have a non-delay clock that can show the minutes and seconds, that may be able to be set to automatically move to the next time control when there are multiple time controls, can be set more accurately at the start of the game, can be more accurately adjusted during the game (for things like, but not limited to, time getting added for an opponent’s illegal move or time getting removed for having a cell phone go off), and gives the exact times to be used when determining the setting of a delay clock in the event an insufficient losing chances claim is made where the opponent rejected the automatic draw offer and the director opted to put a delay clock on rather than simply granting or denying the claim.

6

You have a non-standard clock for sudden death time controls. Set increment to zero and use as the same as an analog. Analog vs digital (w/delay) rules apply.
A clock with time delay set takes precedence, if there’s a choice.

7

It means, don’t use it. Or set the increment to zero, and play without the delay.

Be sure to inform your opponent that your clock does not have the delay, and that therefore he has the right to furnish and use his own (delay-capable) clock instead.

Do NOT simply set your clock for a 5-second increment if the tournament calls for a 5-second delay. I’ve seen people do this, and it causes tempers to flare near the end of the game.

It can be difficult or impossible, early in the game, to know whether the clock is set for delay or increment. As long as the players take at least 5 seconds to play each move, there is no visible difference. Also, some clocks show only hours and minutes (h:mm) until they go below 60 minutes, or 20 minutes, or 10 minutes, or 5 minutes, so even if some moves are played quickly you still might not know.

Then, during the inevitable time scramble, one of the players suddenly notices that his opponent’s time is actually INCREASING with each move, and he blows a fuse. And at that point, it’s not easy for the TD to come up with a ruling fair to all.

Bill Smythe