Increment time controls

Running Chess Tournaments
1

The following are the modifications and additions to the Official Rules of Chess drafted by the Rules Committee to be approved by the Board of Delegates in Dallas in August.

Increment time controls are becoming more popular, and are now “standard” in FIDE sponsored events. These laws were drafted to codify within the USCF the option of using such controls.

Constructive comments are welcome by those who have experienced such controls and may have experienced circumstances that we have not experienced or anticipated.

Modify the U.S. Chess Federation’s Official Rules of Chess as follows:

5B1. Increment time controls. If the time control indicates an incremental (added) time, the abbreviation Inc is generally used, the added time is usually given in seconds of added time.

5F1. Standard timer for increment. An increment clock (a clock with added time capabilities) is the standard timer.
a. The increment clock is set to add time for each move, called an increment. The standard increment is 30 seconds per move. For quick chess the standard increment is 15 seconds per move. A game with an increment time control should be set with the increment in effect from move one, even if the time control is mixed. (e.g. 40/90, SD/30, Inc/30) A game started without an increment capable clock should remain the timer for the game.
TD tip: Increment mode, added time, and Fischer modes are equivalent.
b. If an increment clock or a similar clock is not available, 5F applies and the increment time may be applied as a delay.
c. If an increment clock is not available, and the only delay clock available cannot be set to the equivalent delay time, then the delay clock may be set to the maximum allowable delay time (for the clock) not to exceed the increment time.
• Variant: Total time may be adjusted to compensate for increment time lost.
TD tip (variant): Suggested time adjustment is one minute for each second of increment or delay time lost.
d. If neither an increment capable clock nor a delay capable digital clock (e.g. analog clock), then the game may be played without increment or delay, and follow the time control rules (regular or sudden death) as appropriate.
• Variant: Total time may be adjusted to compensate for increment.
TD tip (variant): Suggested adjusted time is one minute for each second of increment.

13C7 at the end add See also: 15 The recording of the games.

14H1. Explanation. This procedure is not available for which a clock is being used with time delay or increment, …

14K Claim of Insufficient Losing Chances does not apply in increment games.

15B. Scorekeeping in time pressure, non-sudden death time control. If Either Player has less than five minutes remaining in a non-sudden death time control and does not have additional time (increment) of 30 seconds or more added with each move, both players are excused from the obligation to keep score…
TD TIP: Only players in games with increment time controls of 30 seconds or more and using properly set increment capable clocks are required to keep score at all times, even in the last five minutes of any time control period. Players using improperly set increment clocks or non-increment capable clocks, even those clocks adjusted for an increment time control, are regulated by rule 15B.

15C. Scorekeeping in time pressure, sudden death time control. If Either Player has less than five minutes remaining in a sudden death time control and does not have additional time (increment) of 30 seconds or more added with each move, both players are excused from the obligation to keep score….
TD TIP: Only players in games with increment time controls of 30 seconds or more and using properly set increment capable clocks are required to keep score at all times, even in the last five minutes of any time control period. Players using improperly set increment clocks or non-increment capable clocks, even those clocks adjusted for an increment time control, are regulated by rule 15C.

16Bb. Delay or increment: Time delay or increment clocks should be set… to their opponents. The time delay or increment should be set according to the director’s instructions, with the time delay or increment in force starting at move one (5Fb). Clocks equipped to do so should be set for a Bronstein or a delay mode for delay controls or for Fischer, added time, or increment mode for increment controls.
TD TIP: Directors are not expected to know how to set delay or increment clocks (5F) but…
TD TIP: Some players due to incapacity or due to religious reasons cannot use some types of clock such as electric, electronic or with digital displays. After a director…

42E Increment clock preferable in increment time controls. A properly set clock with time increment capability is preferable to any other clock in a game stipulating increment time controls. Therefore, if White has such a clock available and black does not, white’s clock should be used. The only occasion where black retains the right to use the clock of their choice, is if both players have an increment clock or if white is late for the game and the game is started, and black has already set up the equipment. In any particular game, if the digital clock cannot be properly set, then the opponent of the player providing the clock may choose which legal clock is to be used. Order of standard clock preference is given in 5F1.

Submitted on behalf or the Rules Committee by
David Kuhns, Chair

2

Some points.

First, based on your introduction, I understand that the committee is not seeking to replace clocks with time delay or even to give increment-capable clocks first preference, but rather, that only if the td/organizer asks that this option be used, that it can be the standard for the event. If this could be stated more clearly (especially if I’m wrong!) that would be appreciated.

In non-increment events, what is the preferred order of clocks, supposing a clock comes out with added time/move only without delay options? 1)Clocks with time-delay, 2)clocks with increment time-options only, 3)analog clocks? Or in this case, are increment clocks with no delay options mere “digital clocks without time-delay capability” and thus less standard than analog clocks? That question will be asked if that equipment exists and it needs an explicit rule.

If an event is an increment-based one, what clock gets put in place (if applicable) after 14H claims for games begun with analog clocks - a delay one or an increment one? If in a non-increment event, an increment clock is available for a game after a proper 14H claim, but a time-delay clock is not available, can the increment clock be used? Will the non-claimant always be made aware of that when considering the implied draw offer?

Adding 42E, as you write it, would set up an inherent conflict with the first sentence of 42D and the first sentence of the second paragraph of 5F, for events using the increment option. “A properly set clock with time delay capability is preferable to any other clock in a game with any sudden death time control.”

I would insert two words in your 5F1 to be slightly more precise: “An increment clock (a clock with added time per move capabilities) is the standard timer.”

Among your 5F1 variants, you’re going to want to add stronger language about shortening the time controls with something like “The TD has the right to shorten the basic time control…etc.”, clearly making it the TD’s prerogative.

Next question: is G/29 + 15 sec. increment quick rated only? Is G/60 + 30 sec increment quick ratable? I would say these don’t make sense, and I would add language on rulebook page 260 about “etime”, a concept produced by ICC (if not before them) over ten years ago. From their help file on “bullet” they have: “The exact boundary between “bullet” and “blitz” is defined by “etime < 3”. etime is the time + 2/3 increment. So 3 0 is blitz. 2 0 is bullet. 2 1 is bullet. 2 2 is blitz. 0 4 is bullet. Etc. Bullet time control games count towards your bullet rating, not your blitz rating.” I would strongly suggest introducing this term to the rulebook and I also think their formula is a good one. So, let’s try some examples. Is 40 30 slower than G/60 with this forumla? 40 + (2/3 x 30) = 40 + 20 = 60, the exact same, so dual-rated using current USCF rules. So 41 30 should be rated regular chess only. Still, you would have to be careful: if the nonstandard 2 120 were used which by etime is slower than G/60, would a player forfeit if 2-minutes late to his board at the start of the game?

Next is major. Can a player who has flagged get himself out of forfeit time if his opponent has not noticed it? Say the time control includes a 30 sec. inc. I think on my move, and flag, my opponent does not notice, and 20 seconds after I flag I make my move. The rules committee needs to decide how, if clocks are so equipped, to deal with the possibilities. Do I now have 10 seconds? or 30 seconds? or must the clock forfeit me to be considered legal for use (as in it adds no time)? If I flag but hit my clock going above zero seconds, it’s going to be hard to prove a flag fall without a witness present, unless a rule like “if on your opponent’s time, you have less than N seconds left, where N is the increment time used, you are considered to have overstepped the time control, thus forfeiting the game.” Basically, it seems to me that if the increment timer goes to 0 but adds time later getting above 0, the clock needs to be considered illegal equipment. Otherwise it will be really hard to flag a cheater without witnesses present.

Another biggie. How far does one go to correct additional time added after illegal moves or non-move punches of the clock? Say I make a move and leave my piece badly placed on the square. Under the old rule, my opponent would just punch my clock and tell me to straighten it. This would now give me an extra 30 seconds! Yikes! This and similar situations need to be clearly addressed. This might even affect Black starting White’s clock on the first move.

How do you prevent colluding players from doing a quick 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.Nb1 Nb8 as many times as they want to start the game in order to gain more time on the clock?

I hope this helps. Thank you very, very much for getting language about increment time controls in the rulebook. Having this option is quite useful. It always struck me as funny that the USCF quick rated events on ICC never used an allowable USCF time control since they were using increment instead of delay. It’s nice to advance past the stone ages.BB

3

Most clocks with delay or increment (note that Bronstein is largely non-cumulative increment) will freeze for the player who goes to zero. There has been some question on this forum whether the opponent’s clock should freeze at that time also, so that the “both flags down” situation is impossible, but I don’t think anyone has spoken against the player’s clock freezing at zero.

Alex Relyea

4

Of course, but it only takes one clock manufactured differently to make a rules nightmare. Thus, I think that if increment clocks are allowed, clocks that don’t auto-forfeit/freeze should be explicitly considered illegal by the rules, to be replaced at the first instance if found to be in use, and their owners to be punished (nothing major - warning at first) if deemed appropriate. If the rule doesn’t exist, it has the potential to open a can of worms that we really don’t want.

5

So would you prefer a non-increment clock to a delay clock that doesn’t freeze at zero? That seems rather unintuitive to me, since any delay clock is closer to the ideal than an old fashioned non-increment clock.

6

What is “a delay clock that doesn’t freeze at 0”? Are you talking about analog clocks? Or something else? Plus I really don’t care what I believe - I just want clear rules.

7

Ben’s point seems to be that a “cumulative increment” clock which keeps running will add time, making it difficult to determine that a player has lost on time. (Make three moves fast and you have a minute again!) An analog (“real”) clock has a flag to give unambiguous proof that the player’s time has expired.

That being said, I think this is a pointless argument, since the specs for all digital clocks require a “signal at the end of the time control period.” (The wording on this is a bit confusing, but in context it obviously means some visual indication equivalent to a flag fall.) A clock lacking that would be “illegal equipment.”

8

Also, my muddled brain can’t decide if with both players arriving late to a game with increment time controls would splitting the start time be the same in all increment cases as in all non-increment cases? I think the normal rule still works here, but I’m not sure.

Also for the purposes of sudden death time pressure the committee needs to either reaffirm or change what that standard is. Is 5:00 with 30 secs in a SD time control considered to be time pressure? This could affect a few assorted rules like adjournment (perhaps this rule will lead to an adjournment revival) or a director pointing out illegal moves.

9

It may be worth noting that many of the objections and quibbles about cumulative add-on arise only if it is used in a large event with USCF time-forfeit procedure. In a FIDE-procedure tournament (probably the majority of tournaments using this so far), the arbiter counts moves and calls the flag. If it were up to me, I’d make the rule read that “Fischer increment” may be used only if FIDE time forfeit procedure is also used, but I don’t expect to win that argument. The question then becomes, how much detail and elaboration are we willing to include for the fairly small number of “big” tournaments that are going to use this?

10

John, I was already thinking along those same lines - games where arbiters call flags or games played on an internet platform where the server calls the flag. That would certainly be the safest option if the manpower exists. It would be a shame not to allow this rule because of this lack of TD availability however.

Anyways, back to your “flag rule” - 5G. “Monitoring of each player’s time is effected by means of a clock equipped with a flag or other special device used to signal the end of a time control; the flag falls to indicate the player’s time has been used up.” As you point out earlier there are several problems with the wording. Instead of “the end of a time control” it should say “when a player runs out of time.” But, John, I can’t see where in the rulebook it explicitly states that lack of a flag makes the clock illegal. But even if that were granted/inferred, this rule doesn’t state that in an increment event that a digital clock that ‘flags’ you according to 5G can’t put your flag back up, so to speak, when you eventually do move. In the end, we need the rule: “When a player’s time elapses, a clock using an increment mode must never automatically grant extra time, or else it is considered illegal equipment.”

11

Look under , starting on page 227. My point was that any digital clock must show some “time expired” indicator, analogous to a flag, so it shouldn’t really matter if the clock keeps running. However, there is a more subtle problem with increment clocks. Suppose the time claim is rejected? If a couple of moves were played after the flag fall but before the claim, should the player get to keep the time gained? I’d say yes, but the point should be clarified.

12

I read that earlier this evening, and reread it again, just to make sure, and unless a rule was added, it doesn’t say anything about digital clocks without signalling devices being illegal, nor does it say that once you flag, you can’t unflag (relevant with increments). The title of the section is “Basic requirements” but then the section undoes itself by using the softening word “should”. You write “must” above, but I’m afraid that’s not in the book. Regardless, these sentences refer to the first two words of the paragraph: “analog clocks”, which are not at issue. As it stands now, I’ll stand by my earlier claim that the rulebook doesn’t say anything relevant about this issue.

13

I’m not sure you’ve considered the implications of this. Suppose A and B are playing with a “normal” (non-sudden-death) time control. A’s flag falls. B doesn’t notice. They play another half-dozen moves (with B not keeping score), at which point B notices the flag fall and makes a claim. The claim is, of course, rejected. The game must continued to the next time control. But if A’s clock “froze” when the first time control ran out, he got the time for those last half-dozen moves free, and, in effect, carries it over into the second time control.

14

Page 228: “If such clocks are used in competition, the providers should, upon request, explain all relevant facts to the tournament director and each opponent. Relevant operational facts to be explained include, but are not limited to, the signal at the end of the time control period, any display change from minutes to seconds and any resetting that might occur at the start of a new time control period.” (Emphasis mine.)

This should be read in the context of page 227: “Analog chess clocks … should have a device that clearly indicates the end of a time control, such as a flag that falls when the minute hand reaches the mark at the number 12.” (Emphasis in original.)

“Illegal” is probably too strong. But as a TD, I would certainly rule a digital clock which did not have a visible “time expired” indicator as non-standard. That doesn’t mean it can’t be used. It does mean that any other clock would take priority, and if the players agree to use that one they do so at their own risk.

15

Regarding 42B.

First of all, a nitpick, the “such clocks” you cite are referred to in the first sentence of the paragraph as “digital clocks with time delay” unless it actually refers to the penantecedent, the title of the paragraph “digital clocks.” If the rule you cite refers only to clocks with time delay, then we need to reword that rule to include all digital clocks.

Secondly, and more serious, it says only that people have to explain (and only upon request) “the signal at the end of the time period.” That sentence only implies, but does not state a clock has to have such a signal. If they were required to have one, then a rule should exist mandating such, right? As mentioned earlier, p.227 only uses the word “should”, not “must”. Finally, you haven’t mentioned the “unflag” concept. Anyways, I don’t see the point of arguing this, John. Regardless of which of us is correct on this issue, doesn’t adding the sentence I suggested earlier (“When a player’s time elapses, a clock using an increment mode must never automatically grant extra time, or else it is considered illegal equipment.”) totally clarify this so all arguments on the matter cease?

16

As I pointed out several posts back, the wording of that section is clumsy. This is probably because, when it was written, digital clocks were a rarity. But I think the intention is clear: digital clocks with no visible time-expired indicator are in the same class as analog clocks with no flag. (Not uncommon at one time, though I doubt there are still any around.)

The problem with your suggested wording is that it seems to assume sudden-death. If a player’s flag falls in a “normal” time control and the claim is rejected, the game must continue. Why should the player not get the benefit of any addback time under those circumstances? Certainly you can argue that he shouldn’t as a matter of policy, but that’s an argument you have to make before inserting a “technical” rules clarification which would have that effect.

17

That’s a good point. Does anyone know how clocks with move counters handle this?

Alex Relyea

18

On a practical note, how often does increment get used with multiple periods? The only increment tournaments I’ve seen are 90min+30sec/move, or maybe 60+30.

19

I have a question about 5F1b: I have a clock that is capable of increment
as well as delay modes, but I only use the delay modes, so I don’t know
how to program the increment mode. Is it OK in this case to use the clock
in delay mode, even though it is technically increment capable?

Jim

20

Thank you all for your comments. Many good points were brought up and will be considered in the final draft.
Keep in mind that a game with increment controls (assuming standard increment of 30 seconds or greater) is NOT considered “sudden death”. Thus G/90 Inc 30 sudden death rules do not apply. Score must be kept throughout, and the standard timer is not a delay capable clock, but an increment capable clock.

I will not go into any detail arguments here, but I can answer a few of the questions raised:

Increment capable clocks are standard for games or events which stipulate increment time controls. Increment is not sudden death.
Delay capable clocks are standard for games or events which stipulate sudden death time controls. Delay is standard for sudden death.

If in a non-increment event, an increment clock is available for a game after a proper 14H claim, but a time-delay clock is not available, can the increment clock be used?
No.

Is G/29 + 15 sec. increment quick rated only? Is G/60 + 30 sec increment quick ratable?
I am not sure about this one, I will bring it up to the committee. Good question.

Can a player who has flagged get himself out of forfeit time if his opponent has not noticed it?
Yes, just like any other primary, secondary, etc time control. See the rules on how to make a claim.

Whether or not time is added at the end of a move (when white presses his clock time is added to white) or at the beginning (when white presses his clock time is added to black, which is, I believe, the mechanism most clocks use) really makes no technical difference. The time on the clock after the press is the indicator of time remaining and/or of overstepping the control. If you think about it, these are the same.

Thanks,
David Kuhns