I started to reply in a thread about 14H, and decided it was off topic, but interesting enough to start a new thread in this forum.
I can relate to that. The first few times I used a digital clock, I was hating it. At the time, I owned an analog clock, and so did most people ('94 or '95 I think). So my opponent set the clock up for 5min chess + 5 second delay and halfway into the game I was down to 3 minutes, and my opponent still had well over 4 minutes left. OUCH. Ya, for a long time after that, I was hating digital clocks.
Seriously though, its true, older players that are used to analog clocks and played with them for decades might have a harder time adjusting to the fact that with a delay, they can no longer count on trying to run thier opponent out of time as a stratagy. The opponent will still be in a time scramble, no doubt, but can’t be forced to lose on time alone.
Its a mindset.
It took me a while to get used to the idea that I can’t force my opponent to lose on time. I don’t play 2+12 or 5+10 chess on FICS though, just because I generally suck at speed chess.
But I’m more than happy to play longer time controls with bonus time. (Delay doesn’t exist on FICS, just incremental). Probably my favorite time is 10+5.
Just happenstance, but I was talking to the “other opponent” of a letter in the May issue of Chesslife in which the writer was complaining that his opponent won a game under severe time pressure because he couldn’t force the opponent to run out of time.
To summarize the letter: The author wanted to try and change the delay rules so that even if you moved during the delay time of 3 - 5 seconds, the clock would lose at least 1 second regardless. ~my friend said the end position was K+ Q -vs- K +P.
I disagree, but more because I think the stratagy of trying to win on time is a mindset. Some people will never be comfortable with the notion that you might not be able to force your opponent to run out of time.
For slow thinkers like myself, I can easily run out of time with the 5 second delay. I’ve often wondered what genius came up with 5 seconds. 30 seconds just might be enough for me.
Despite the fact that I used analog clocks for nearly 25 years, I was an early convert to digitals once the designs were improved over the horrible Kaissa, which was the first one.
I have always had trouble with time pressure. In 1994, playing with my analog clock in a G/60 event, I lost on time to a player 700 points lower rated, in a position in which I was a queen ahead. I knew about 14-H of course but wouldn’t make the claim against a 1500. He even tried to give me an out by offering the draw but I wanted a win or nothing. Well, my flag fell and immediately after I got home, I ordered a digital clock. It made an enormous difference. I can’t begin to count the number of times that 5 second delay has allowed me to blitz out the moves to victory.
In 2001, I had the ultimate 5 second delay game. I had a dead lost ending against GM Alexander Kalinin, with one second left on my clock. I made over 20 moves using the 5 second delay until finally he got low on time too and blundered a rook. Soon after that he made an illegal move and I immediately claimed the 2 min. penalty, on which he resigned. That’s the only game I’ve ever won from a GM.
So, digital clocks get a big vote of approval from me.
I dislike digital clocks, and I despise time delays with a passion. 90 minutes (or however many) and you’re done. No bailout for people with poor time management!
The Annual Buying Guide offers two mechanical clocks listed as “Regulation”.
An unfortunate designation, since a time delay digital would supercede it.
Which brought up a question…has anyone designed a digital clock with a traditional analog clock face and also having time delay capability? Something in wood would be nice…
Per rule “5F” the 5 second delay is more of a reaction time and less of a time for thinking.
Attempting to win on time is certainly a decent strategy. But I believe the introduction of they delay clock rules and the “Insufficient loosing chances” rule shows that the spirit of the game is to make the best moves possible and the clock is just there to encourage players to keep the game moving rather than to determine the outcome of the game. And these rules are there specifically to discourage playing poor quality moves in an attempt to win on time.
I don’t intend for this to sound rude, but if you opt not to learn to play with a digital clock, that’s your problem. I don’t think there’s much sympathy for people who can spend hours studying chess, and who memorize hundreds of variations of openings, but find the operation of a digital clock incomprehensible. If it’s a true disability and not just lazyness or resistance to change, there are procedures for dealing with that.
Garde factory did exactly that, they used to have a hybrid model in wood with analog faces at the sides and digital display in the middle. Delay has been implemented as Bronstein. (Let’s not get into discussion why or why not this is not an equivalent to what I call North American delay like in Chronos).
Garde Hybrid has issue with visibility, analog minute hands moved once per minute and digital display in the middle was hard to view.
You can still find this model at auction sites from time to time.
I don’t recommend that Garde hybrid. The digital portion had a dark greenish-gray background that was hard to read. The analog portion had actual mechanical hands, driven by the clock’s digital innards, and the minute hand moved in increments of 1 minute. Thus, a player might think he had a full minute remaining when in fact he had only a second or two.
Better would be an electronic analog display, similar to what you see (on at least some computers) if you right-click the time of day in the lower right corner of the screen, then choose “Adjust Date/Time”. Even in that case, though, the minute hand still moves in 1-minute increments. It would be better if it moved in increments of, say, 5 or 6 seconds, with a second-hand also displayed and moving in 1-second increments.
Digital clocks are much better than analog clocks, in theory.
But in practice, to date no great digital clock has yet become available for mass market sale.
How strange that is, because my Chronos cost over $100, and for $200 I can get a Windows_7 netbook computer capable of running MS Office and surfing the web.
Unless I am missing something, the vaunted Chronos lacks basics like an Increment feature, in addition to be absurdly complex to set.
The long letter to Bruce Pandolfini, at the bottom of this link, argues for a generally contrary point of view. It argues that an Increment (not Delay) is an important part of any normal/long time control.
“The primary goal of the chess clock is to keep the game progressing forward. The goals of the time control should include the mitigation of any side effects that the clock can have on the game.”
The clock should not be the 33rd piece (to any greater extent than is necessary).
Well you are missing something. The vaunted Chronos does not lack an increment feature. In fact it has both the USCF type delay option, the Bronstein or “after the move” delay option, as well as the increment feature. It also has options where no delay or increment is used.
It is also not necessarily complex to set. There are 3 basic options that are used over 96.354% of the time. Each of these timing options are easily saved in the first memory settings. They are then accessed by simply “short” pressing the center red button once, twice or thrice times when first turning the clock on.
Modifying any of the time specifics from the memory setting is also not difficult or complex. It is a simple thing to hold that same, multi-functioning center red button down until the individual numbers of the LCD start to flash. Simply short pressing the button on the side of the display will subsequently change the number that is flashing. Short pressing the center red button again makes the next set of digits in the display flash, allowing them to be modified, likewise. Also saving the setting in one of the memory spots only requires putting the number of the memory spot in the display in the “Save In” spot and then simply holding down that nice little red center button once again until it is saved.
The Saitek Competition Pro has a very similar manner to change and save its settings as well.
In case you would like to know, the most commonly used and best settings for the Chronos are:
AN - 1A 15-5:00 This one I save in the #1 memory slot and use it for my single digit, minute quick and blitz play with a delay. Of course, I set the delay down to 5 seconds from the 15 in the initial setting.
CH - A1 5-90:00 This one I save in the #2 memory slot. I use this one for all my 2 digit, minute time controls, from 10 minutes to 90 minutes. Of course this also has a standard 5 second delay.
AN - 1 15-1:00:00 This one I save in the #3 memory slot. This one is used for my G/120 (2 hours) with the delay set to the standard 5 seconds.
There are others I might save in slot #4. It depends on which clock and set-up I am using. In my Blitz set, House of Staunton Liberty Series with roll-up board, I have the 5:00_0 setting there with no delay and the tenths of a second showing.
In my nicest set, House of Staunton Marshall Series with a Signature Traditional Green/Bird’s Eye Maple board, I have a multiple time control setting saved there.
For the extra slot… Hourglass! I used to love hourglass setting play. Still do - just hard to find others who will play it. And I used to play a variation of it in casual play - running out of time didn’t mean losing, just that one had to immediately reply. Opponent gets to use up to full reverse hourglass setting on next move, and after that move, reset the clock back to the beginning time and start over.
Gene has a good point, though. It should be far from impossible, and maybe even profitable, to take two color LCD panels and a microcontroller kit and whomp up one **** of a color digital / analog digital clock with all the settings one could possibly dream of. Battery drain would be the biggest issue to solve. Or even one long enough micro LCD panel (was thinking of two 320x240 Palm T|X style LCD’s but…)
False, unless you have a very old model. On most models CH-P5 is what you want. On my somewhat older model, with a switch on the bottom, it’s CH-P3.
It is way more difficult to become an 1800 player (or even a 1200 player) than it is to learn how to set the Chronos. Anybody who can learn how the pieces move can easily master the Chronos. Anybody who can’t, doesn’t want to. Apparently, for some, it’s more fun to complain than to learn.
I see that now. Noteworthy is that the Chronos manual never uses the word ‘increment’ or ‘Bronstein’ in discussing the addition of time per turn.
You did not mention a mode ID, but for me it looks like CH-P7 has increment and is flexible. It can mimic sudden death on first or second time control, and it can morph to very short or very long time controls.
Multiple times I have seen people ask me or another person how to set their own Chronos, but I cannot recall that happening with any other digital clock (Excaliber, Saitek which I also own). I take those requests for help as evidence that the Chronos deserves low marks for ease of use, and that it suffers from an higher than average learning curve.
With other digital clock brands, I have seen it take people several minutes to read the underside IDs stickered on the clock. But they figure it out quickly enough, on their own.
Agreed.
After re-reading the 48 page Chronos manual while guided by your CH-P5 suggestion, I see now that its close brother CH-P7 is the mode ID I likely would need for the standard long time control games at my clubs, with an increment.
I agree it would be nice if the Chronos manual would use the same terminology as the rest of the chess world. On the other hand, Chronos had an increment mode before the word “increment” came into common use, within either USCF or FIDE. So they called it “progressive” instead.
As for Bronstein, that’s somebody’s name, so there may be copyright problems.
I’d like to see the use of the generic terms “cumulative addback” and “non-cumulative addback”. For example:
“cumulative addback, also known as increment, progressive, Fischer, FIDE, or bonus”
and
“non-cumulative addback, also known as Adagio or Bronstein”
and
“delay, theoretically equivalent to non-cumulative addback but with a different presentation”.
I have. Frequently. Especially with the Saitek. That’s why I make it a policy not to set digital clocks for the players. If you don’t know how to set it, get a BHB. (Though I did have one player come up to me with an analog clock, saying he’d never used one before and didn’t know how to set it.)
I’ve noticed that owners of older Saitek models have a greater tendency than owners of other clocks to set it without the delay (Bronstein) turned on. So perhaps the older Saitek, rather than the Chronos, is the most difficult clock to set?
And I used to play a variation of it in casual play - running out of time didn’t mean losing, just that one had to immediately reply. Opponent gets to use up to full reverse hourglass setting on next move, and after that move, reset the clock back to the beginning time and start over.