In reading tournament postings, if the time allowed is listed as G/(90+30) does that mean a single 90 min. period w/ a 30 sec. delay? Or two periods, one 90 and one 30 w/ 5 sec being assumed? No move limitation?
When there are multiple time controls the first will be in the format of xx/yy where xx is the number of moves to be made in yy minutes (if yy is 1 or 2 then it is hours rather than minutes).
Delay is generally in the format of G/90 d30 (for a 30 second delay so that a move taking up to 30 seconds takes no time off of the clock and moves taking more than 30 seconds only take the time off the clock that is in excess of 30 seconds). My guess as to what the +30 means is that there is a 30 second increment (time added to the clock each move even if the actual move was done in less than 30 seconds).
Is the tournament in question the Stillwater Winter FIDE Open? That’s a Frank Berry tournament, and he’s taken to the 30 second increment thing. He says that it gives players plenty of time to record every move (making legible scoresheets) and still allows the game to get done in a reasonable amount of time. Jeff’s impression is correct. If you’re talking about some other tournament, then I’m not sure.
Alex Relyea
There is no OFFICIAL standard for how to code time controls, and so many different time controls in use that it might be challenging to come up with such a standard, though I think that’s something that really needs to be done.
Such a standard would also need to take into account how to indicate events where the time control varies from round to round or from one schedule to another.
G/(90+30) almost certainly means game in 90 minutes with a 30-second increment (cumulative addback) rather than a 30-second delay (non-cumulative addback).
For one thing, 30 seconds has become pretty standard for increment controls. For another, most organizers would use “d” or “td” rather than a plus + sign for (non-cumulative) delay. For a third thing, many organizers have taken up the plus sign as a symbol for (cumulative) increment.
I wish everybody would standardize on “d” for delay and “inc” for increment. G/60 d/5 would mean game in 60 minutes with a 5-second delay. G/60 inc/30 would mean game in 60 minutes with a 30-second increment. I think David Kuhns (chairman of the rules committee) suggested something like this a while back, but apparently the publications department isn’t listening.
And please, let’s get rid of the atrociously redundant phrase “time delay” (and its abbreviation “td”) once and for all. What other kind of delay is there? Height delay? Weight delay?
By the way, a 5-second delay is the default for tournaments which do not specifically announce either a delay or an increment, so just G/60 means the same thing as G/60 d/5.
Bill Smythe
According to Rule 5F, 5 seconds is the standard delay for games that are G/30 or slower, ie regular or dual rated.
I’m not entirely sure how to read 5F with regards to faster games, for quick rated [only] games it says 3 seconds is the standard delay and for Blitz games (G/5) it says 2 seconds is the standard delay, but does that refer only to Blitz games that are not being USCF rated?
The latest update to the rulebook, available at uschess.org/docs/gov/reports … hanges.pdf, says that ‘inc’ is the standard abbreviation for an increment setting.
I find that a bit clumsy and incomplete. Should Game 30 plus 5 seconds increment be coded as G/30 inc5 or as G/30 5inc? (G/30 i5 is probably unacceptable because the ‘i’ could easily be misread as the number one.)
I suggest that ‘+xx’ mean xx seconds of increment and ‘dxx’ mean XX seconds of delay.
Thus G/30d5 and G/30+5 would mean a time control of Game/30 with 5 seconds of delay and increment, respectively.
I would further suggest that G/xx be used ONLY when there is just the one time control and that SD/xx be used when there is more than one time control and the final time control is sudden death.
Thus 30/15 SD/15 would mean 30 minutes for the first 15 moves and 15 minutes for the remainder of the game.
BTW, for the purposes of determining which rating systems are applicable, and as long as the delay or increment is no more than 15 seconds, this is now considered equivalent to G/45 and is a dual-ratable time control. If, however, there are more than 15 seconds delay or increment, then this would be a regular-only ratable time control.
The increment or delay notation would be appended to the first time control to which it applies.
Thus 30/15+5 SD/15 means that 5 seconds increment applies to the entire game, while 30/15 SD/15+5 means that there is no increment during the first 30 moves.
(Whether there should be increment or delay during the entire game or just the final SD time control is a policy question, the notational standard needs to deal with either possibility.)
I think you got your “30” and “15” reversed in this example. Time controls are usually given as Moves/Minutes or Moves/Hours.
Let’s keep it simple and uniform. Use the slash / symbol for increment and delay, just as they are already used for the main control(s). Put the digit(s) after the slash. Forget about parentheses, plus signs, etc.
Examples:
G/60 d/5 (game in 60 minutes with a 5-second delay).
G/90 inc/30 (game in 90 minutes with a 30-second increment).
40/60 SD/30 d/5 (40 moves in 60 minutes, then sudden death in 30 minutes, with a 5-second delay throughout).
40/60 d/0 SD/30 d/5 (40 moves in 60 minutes, then sudden death in 30 minutes, with a 5-second delay on the second control only).
Other fervent suggestions:
Use “inc” (lower case) for increment. “INC” (uppercase) just looks bad, and “i” alone is close to invisible (may look like the digit 1).
Use “d” rather than “td” for delay.
Bill Smythe
I fail to see why your way of doing it is either simpler OR more uniform. A ‘/’ now has two different meanings.
BTW, I did get moves/time reversed. :sigh:
instead of increment abbreviated with an ‘i’, perhaps:
cumulative with a ‘c’
moretime with an ‘m’
accumulate/accumulative/additive with an ‘a’
Thus:
40/2 a30
G/60 d5
or, even though it’s not usually combinable:
40/120 d5, G/30 a30
Great idea, let’s change the notation to something else just because it makes for a better initial. 
During the recent FIDE Congress in Dresden several important topics have been discussed and several important decisions have been taken among others
Standardization of time controls
The following standard has been set for classical games:
Times with increments -
a) (G-90’) + 30"
b) (90’/40 + G-30’) + 30"
c) (100’/40 + 50’/20 + G-15’) + 30"
Times without increments
d) 120’/40 + G-30’
e) 120’/40 + G-60’
f) 120’/40 + 60’/20 + G-30’
Tournaments, in which other time controls are used, shall not be taken into consideration for title purposes (GM, IM, WGM, WIM norms) starting from the 1st of July 2009.
This won’t affect the US Open, which is 40/2, SD/60, or the US Championships, which use G/90 + 30 seconds increment, but I wonder what other long-standing FIDE-rated events in the USA will have to either consider changing their format or no longer have the ability to offer norm possibilities?
Actually, no. It means that the following digit(s) represent a time interval (hours, minutes, or seconds).
Bill Smythe
The US Championships have never used G/90 + 30 seconds increment, which is a very fast time control (a 60 move game has only 4 hours). Last year in Tulsa the time control was 40/100, SD/30 + 30 seconds, and this year in St. Louis I believe it will be 40/2, SD/1 with 5 seconds delay.
I use only 40/2, SD/1 with 5 seconds delay for norm events, but don’t understand why the fast G/90 + 30 seconds is allowed, but not a slower control such as 40/90, SD/1 or 30/90, SD/1 which are 5 hour games.
Bill Goichberg
So, does that mean that if the 2010 US Championships use the same time control used last year (and presumably being used again in May) it will no longer be possible to earn a FIDE norm at the US Championships?
40/100 with or without any increment apparently will no longer be able to produce norms. However, that control is not being used in Saint Louis, as I said. And I don’t think it will ever be used again as long as FIDE disallows norms with this control.
Bill Goichberg
i