While shopping for chess clocks online, I came across the following at the DGT site:
[i]FIDE rules and regulations:
ONLY electronic clocks should be used in all FIDE rated tournaments starting from 1 July 2017.
This means that analogue clocks are no longer allowed.
All electronic clocks must function in full accordance with the FIDE laws of chess.
This means only FIDE approved clocks can be used for example DGT2010, DGT XL or DGT3000.[/i]
Does this mean that in 29 months all non-DGT digital clocks must be approved by FIDE or else will be banned from FIDE-rated play? As I understand it, manufacturers need to pay FIDE to test their clocks, plus based on the FIDE clock standards as I read them, none of the other main brands would qualify. (Not sure about the ZmartFun.)
Scratching my head. This is not the way for the mothership to take over the stubbornly independent colonies where the gold is buried—for those who think that way.
Not that that will stop stubborn colonists from buying the DGT 3000, if it’s as good as it looks on paper. Just a few bucks less and I would have one now. Maybe in Parsippany…
I’m pretty sure the FIDE specifications were written by the manufacturer of the DGT clocks. It becomes quite easy for a manufacturer to follow the FIDE specs, if that manufacturer is the one who wrote the specs, and almost impossible for any other manufacturer.
The “stubborn independent colonists” are another problem. The halt-at-end feature is a classic example. This feature is demanded by FIDE, but frowned upon by USCF. How is that supposed to work in events that are both FIDE- and USCF-rated??
Even DGT attempted to bridge this gap with the North American model, but they did it in a weird way. This model turns on halt-at-end in increment modes, but turns it off in delay modes, apparently on the theory that (a) delay is standard in the USA but (b) increment is standard everywhere else. Both assumptions (a) and (b) are highly questionable, especially assumption (a), now that increment is becoming popular in the USA.
But what’s a manufacturer supposed to do, when faced with standards that directly contradict each other?
The ADM to frown upon halt-at-end was passed by the USCF delegates in (I think) 2013. It was sponsored by a Delegate for whom I have the greatest respect, and whose opinions I normally value, but who really blew it with this one, IMHO.
I would hope for a more successful effort, on the parts of both FIDE and USCF, to bridge these various gaps rather than to widen them.
Precisely. That’s what I meant to get at. As we see not so well-hidden between the lines in the Issues forum, the FIDE/USCF divide ‘thing’ seems to be back—though maybe it never went away but was just kept from the sight of backbenchers from the boonies.
As for halt-at-end. Here we saw the greatness of the Chronos. That clock can be set either to halt or not halt in any time control. Not to mention it supports count-down delay, flashing-symbol delay, Bronstein delay and increment, in most cases for up to three controls, with or without a clock press counter. You can set it one way for USCF play, another way for FIDE or “dual”-rated play, etc.
But since other clocks have that hard-coded into them—yes it would be nice to have a consistent standard. I understand Ken B’s reasons for pushing through the rule that mandates no halt-at-end, but I dunno…increment for anything longer than Blitz is almost always at least 10 seconds, and most often 30.
And A. I don’t care about blitz, which IMO should not be rated; and B. With a minimum of 10 seconds increment, I can deal with the argument that the clock is an objective “arbiter,” etc.
But maybe getting straight on clock standards and a few other rules discrepancies can start the peace and harmony train rolling. Maybe.
Now I couldn’t find on the DGT website where that information was posted so I’ll work off of just what Eric posted.
Let’s put this into perspective with full information.
As of 1.July.2017 this requirement is for FIDE Official Competitions (those that appear on the official FIDE calendar which are World, Continental, Zonal, Sub-Zonal events) and for FIDE title norm tournaments.
This is at most 10% of tournaments that happen in the United States which are FIDE rated.
So yes, large swiss events will require the use of digital clocks that have title norms in them. The International Title Regulations already specify that the same timing sequence (no delay, delay, or increment) is used along with the same operational clock (analog or digital). This takes it a step further for title norm tournaments to mandate digital clocks.
I wouldn’t doubt that by 2021 there is a full requirement of digital only. Quite frankly the US should be there as well because it will be ridiculous to be that far in the 21st century and still use analog clocks. 2017 would be too early for a full sweep, but 2021 I can see as a logical amount of time to state.
It’s not fair to blame the sponsor when the approval of the Delegates was overwhelming. At the Rules Workshop, the vote in favor of this motion was something like 15:1 (I was the only dissenter). When I was speaking against this motion at the Rules Workshop, there was a loud remark from Ken Sloan “Come to the National Open sometime!” implying that only someone not familiar with USCF tournament scene would argue against this motion. At the Delegates meeting, again I was the only one speaking against this motion, while there were many people speaking for it. The main argument of those speaking for it is that this is the American way: we don’t want any outside help for the players who are claiming the win on time (outside help coming from the clock in this case). When I was speaking against this motion, I was heckled, and when the chairwoman refused to call for the heckling to stop, I interrupted my remarks and sat back down. Then there were several speakers pro this motion and just before it was my turn to speak again, as I was standing at the “against microphone”, the last person ahead of me at the “pro microphone” called the question and it passed overwhelmingly. To conclude, this is the will of the USCF Delegates.
Sounds like mob psychology to me. A handful of strong supporters of the motion managed to rile up everybody in the room to go their way. That you were heckled, that the chair refused to end the heckling, and that the question was called just as you were standing up to speak, are all proof enough for me.
So the fever pitch created a serious problem in FIDE-rated USA tournaments, for organizers, players, and clock manufacturers alike. This damage may take a long time to undo.
I can envision a FIDE that will say that only specifically approved clocks will be acceptable. That seems well within its authority as a governing body. I think the fear is that FIDE will set up a special license or monopoly with a small set of companies or only one manufacturer of digital clocks. All other companies, even if they make a clock which meets the specs, that don’t pay FIDE its baksheesh, er, ahem, “technical licensing fee”, will be left out in the cold.
Even in 2021, the Jerger clocks, Insas, and old BHB’s with their indestructible innards will still be ticking away. Perhaps we will only see them in small events or at club tournaments, but they will still be in use as timers. If the players do not object, why not? What may happen in 2021 is that all organizers will be required to provide all equipment, that is, clocks, scoring devices, sets, and boards at FIDE events. Six years seems a long time, but technology changes faster. By 2021 we may have to be scanned for internally placed chips or be required to play naked. BTW, can you deflate a digital clock?
It should be noted that even DGT isn’t willing to pay the certification costs for all their clocks. Albert Vasse told me that DGT wouldn’t bother submitting the NA for approval, for example.
Does this mean that by 2021 that there may be no FIDE rated tournaments in the US? If DGT equipment is found unacceptable, then both players and organizers are going to be in a bind.
Does “Halt-at-end” mean that when one player flags, both clocks stop counting? As opposed to only the side that flagged? If so, I think I agree with the delegates on this one. With the player having to “claim” the flag, it’s your one last hope that your opponent doesn’t notice you flagged and he runs out too. Although, I’ve never been successful it achieving a draw this way, so perhaps it doesn’t matter after all.
I believe the incident that prompted the ADM was in a tournament when one player flagged, and the opponent didn’t want to “win that way”. His clock froze, so there was no way for the next 45 minutes for the TD to call both flags down. Basically, without this rule, there is no way for the game to have any set time control because the players are able to play as long as they want with the clock frozen.
As was pointed out during the debate about the ADM, under FIDE rules the arbiter can call the flag, so halt on end doesn’t have this problem.
As I see it, clocks should be able to work with and without halt on end. Turn the halt on end feature on when playing under FIDE rules and turn it off when playing under USCF rules.
The new DGT 3000 allows every option except blinking delay. Halt on end can be turned on or off. My only quibble is that pressing the paddles on my new clock is much louder than my DGT NA. Go figure. It is very similar in capability to my Excalibur which is also noisy. My problem with the Excalibur is that it behaves badly in multiple time controls unless you use the move (clock press) counter. The DGT 3000 doesn’t have a move counter in delay mode but has it as an option in the increment mode. It is optional and not necessary. I just got used to my Jerger ticking away and not adding time and prefer not having the move counter set… My Chronos did every permutation and combination but after a while simply would not turn on. Sent it in 3 times and after many months each time it would come back broken. Finally DCI told me it was unfixable and wonder of wonders refunded my money.
I also like my ZMF but it runs fast - 12 seconds every hour. The manufacturer doesn’t think it’s a big enough deal to replace it and it probably isn’t but I just don’t like the idea that it’s inaccurate and it makes me reluctant to use it.
But the irony is I’m approaching 80 years old and I no longer play in tournaments nor are there any clubs in my area, so I’m doomed to play online. I do enjoy fooling with the clocks and knowing how to set them. Even though the Chronos was flaky, I could set it to do just about anything.
What happens with the clocks when you have a TC of something like 40/90,SD/30 with a 30 second increment. If you run out of time at move 38, is the clock supposed to halt (under FIDE handling)? That seems to rely rather heavily on the move counter being accurate. (And if it doesn’t halt, one assumes the 30 seconds gets added as soon as the player presses the clock).
Can someone please point out to me where in the FIDE handbook I can find the requirement that clocks implement halt on end? I have failed to find this myself. Also, I have a memory of IA Carol Jarecki saying there is no such requirement.
BTW, can you deflate a digital clock?