It does not follow that a player should have to ask(as opposed to expect)that the time delay be activated on a delay capable clock when that instruction has been anounced by the tournament director before the round. Especially since you were there and are probably aware of a loud commotion the same round by a player(R.B) who wanted to not use the delay clock and was advised that it was the preferred method to be used
Shaun
It has been my observation that owners of Chronos and Excalibur clocks usually set them for the delay, while owners of DGT, Duel, and Saitek clocks often do not.
I think this is partly because the Chronos and Excalibur implement delay in a straithtforward manner, whereas with the other three you are forced to use Bronstein mode, which is technically equivalent, but confusing to some players.
The other reason, I think, is that the latter three clocks (at least the older versions) do not allow Bronstein to be used with multiple time controls. If the control is 40/120, SD/60, you would have to set the clock for just the first control, then reset manually at move 40.
Bill Smythe
Thanks for the point by point rebuttal Mr. Smythe. True, the whole problem would be cured by either a written announcement to the effect or a loud statement before the tournament that delay clocks better have delays on them. My whole point here was based on the philosophy that a TD should intervene as little as possible, especially in cases where, in my opinion, the rulebook already covers the situation. The rulebook is very cognizant of the fact that some players don’t know how to set their clocks. Yet there is no specific rule that penalizes them for not knowing, nor is there one for deliberately not doing so. Such a penalty is therefore strictly TD discretionary. I like the sound of the “quality of justice” point, but I’m still not sure I agree that it is just to penalize a player who cannot correctly program a delay clock, when no rule that I can find requires him/her to do so. I also agree that telling the opponent that the delay is not set is the right thing to do, though one is not required by the rules to do so. Even if the clock is such that it is not obvious at the beginning whether the delay is set or not, I still fall back on the rule that says the clock must be explained on request (but not otherwise), and the TD tip that says the clock is not to be replaced after the round starts with the exception of a 14H claim.
As for your last point, about being obnoxious, I would suggest that any player who thinks his opponent obnoxious for exercising his rights under the rules is himself the obnoxious player. Besides, I’d personally rather be obnoxious than lose on time. I have always asked, when not using my own clock, whether the delay was set, and how I’d be able to tell it was set. No one has ever behaved as if they thought I was obnoxious. But that might just be my great smile. )
This tournament we’re talking about was only my second time ever to Assistant TD, and from the looks of things may have also been the end of my TD career, LOL. I would also point out that I wasn’t there until after Round 1 had started so I didn’t hear the announcement about making sure the delay was set. Alex explained all that to me later, and I agree with Shaun that if such an announcement was made, players have a right to expect the clock owner to tell them if the delay is not set rather than having to ask.
My main reason for posting was to understand the philosophy of TD’ing a tournament, not because I disagreed with the ruling. To me, the question was “Do you intervene for justice’s sake, or do you play hardball with the rules?” From the posts that have been made here, it looks like the standard is set higher than just the rulebook. TD’s are to make the tournament as fair as possible, not just make sure it’s all within the rules. This seems to me a good thing, though a much more difficult thing.
Actually, you and I don’t seem to disagree very much. We both recognize that, if a delay is to be required on a delay-capable clock, this fact should be announced at the start of the tournament.
It probably isn’t, and as I said before, I would probably never go so far as to actually enforce points 3 and 4 of my “Dirty Pool” document. That’s mainly to scare people into using the delay who might otherwise be inclined not to. But I would tend to seek out, at the start of each round, games where I had good reason to believe the delay was not set (e.g. one of the players is a known non-delay-setter). I would then point out to the opponent that the delay is not set, and that he therefore has the right to use his own clock instead, or to make a later 14H claim.
I agree. I was more concerned about a player’s possible fear of seeming obnoxious. Many players would really rather not give their opponents the Spanish Inquisition treatment before the game begins.
And may there be many more. Sounds to me as though you did OK.
Bill Smythe