So, you’re saying that a format that might be unintelligible due to typographical misinterpretations is better than one that has no possibility of typographical misinterpretations?
LOL. No. I’m just wondering if it is reasonably impossible to misinterpret it and keep it simpler. And yes, before you say it, I agree that chessplayers are capable of misinterpreting anything!
I am in favor of keeping things easy to understand - but I’m also in favor of ensuring that players are self-sufficient.
d5 for 5 second delay seems to be just about universal, but there is a lot of variation in the notation used for increment. I’m going to go with inc 30 for 30 second increment, with +30 as an acceptable variant, in my ADM. Of course this could be amended by the delegates, or someone might propose his/her own ADM. As I see it, the advantages of inc 30 are: consistency with d5 (adding a space for clarity); “inc” is easier to read than “i”; and it’s more likely to be understood by the reader.
…
Aren’t the uninitiated newbies going to wonder what the heck a “Game 45” is?
And what is up with that d5…how do you even make 5-sided dice…is it a d10 numbered 1-5 twice? 
You’ve got a point, Bill, but the intention of my ADM is to reflect current practice rather than to change it. We seemed to have standardized on d5 rather than d/5 for 5 second delay, and to me it’s easier to change the rules to reflect this rather than make everyone change from d5 to d/5. inc 30 rather than inc/30 is consistent with d5. Of course the delegates may see it differently.
Regarding the +30 notation for increment, I don’t think anyone has used + for delay. In the explanation of symbols at the end of the TLAs in Chess Life, +XX is shown as meaning “Time increment, xx = number of seconds added after each move.” and there is no explanation of inc xx or inc/xx. I like +30 vs. inc 30 or inc/30 because it’s more compact, so I’d like to keep it in the rulebook. Maybe it will catch on as more organizers start using it.
The existing rules already cover all aspects of this (but not with your notation) except that the rules don’t say how to indicate a different delay or increment for different time periods, or delay or increment in some periods and not others. I don’t want to encourage organizers to use mixed controls like that so I’m not going to propose a rules change to cover them.
When I consider issues like the number of first-time players in my events who thought they were out of the tournament because they lost their first round game, the terse TLA formatting was the least of my problems.
My pre-event publicity (which first-time members were far more likely to see than the TLA pages in Chess Life), went into some depth explaining that in a Swiss pairing event you aren’t eliminated just because you lost a game.
Are there people who, if the first time control is not a G/ time control, do not bother to look and see what the subsequent time controls are?
However, I have changed my mind on where the delay/increment information should go. I now think it should go at the end, even when the delay/increment changes between time control periods.
In what follows, I’ll use the dN notation for an N second delay, since that is the current notation for delay.
My suggestion:
• “dN” means a dN applies to the entire game.
• “M/dN” means a dN starts on move M.
• “dN/M” means a dN starts after M minutes.
Consider a tournament with a 40/90 with no delay followed by an SD/30 with 5 second delay. Under the current and other proposed notations it is unclear whether or not the delay starts on move 41 or after 90 minutes. Under my proposal, the former would be listed as “40/90 SD/30 41/d5” and the latter as “40/90 SD/30 d5/90”.
[size=150]Alternatively, I’d be happy if we made it a rule that for USCF rated games, if there is an increment or decrement it must apply to the whole game and must have the same value throughout the game. That makes things a lot simpler[/size].
Don’t we already have this rule? It’s never stopped people from having a major variation.
Alex Relyea
FIDE has run events (world championship events, if I remember right) where the increment doesn’t start until the 2nd time control.
In some ways that makes sense. If the time control for the first 40 moves is 40/120, why add 30 seconds at each move, why not just make the time control 40/140?
I believe that it is the third control, but that changes the meaning not a whit.
To answer the second question, it is to avoid extreme time pressure caused by poor time management. It is really 1/120 (or 1/60, if you prefer to consider the forfeit angle) followed by 39 time controls of 1/.5. I don’t consider a 30 second increment control to have any sudden death, and I believe the rule book supports my interpretation.
Alex Relyea
According to the TD Tip on page 11 of the 5th edition rulebook (rule 5F)
I thought the late forfeiture in FIDE world championship events was: Be present at the scheduled start of the game or you forfeit!
Bold face for emphasis:
5F1. A game with a mixed time control, e.g. 50 moves in two hours followed by sudden death in 30 minutes (50/120 SD/30), is to use a time-delay clock set with 5-second delay from the beginning of the game, if available. However, if the game starts with an analog clock it should remain, except in the procedure described in rules 42D, Delay clock preferable in sudden death and 14H2, Claim of insufficient losing chances in sudden death.
TD TIP: In a mixed time control game, as well as in a single Sudden Death time control, the delay clock, if available, should be set with the Delay or Bronstein mode in force from move one. Some directors announce that delay clocks should be set with the time Delay or Bronstein mode turned on only for the sudden death time control. Directors using this announced variation should expect a great deal of confusion due to the challenges involved in properly setting an assortment of different clocks from a variety of manufacturers, all with diverse time control setting capabilities.
5F2. 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 10 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 clock for the game.
I like the advice a well-known computer expert gave me in 1977: If your client doesn’t take your advice, charge them a much higher hourly fee to fix it.
The 2013 World Championship was 40/120, 20/60, SD/15 with 30 second increment starting on move 61.
However, for most major FIDE events, increment starts at move 1. Here is the rule from the FIDE Handbook:
Here is my modified ADM. I decided to propose using d5 for delay and inc/30 for increment.
OK, that’s pretty good.
I would prefer, however, that “(or +30)” be removed from the standard altogether, so that “inc/30” would be the only standard for increment. Some readers may be confused as to whether “+” denotes increment or delay.
I notice you completely avoided mentioning the thorny issue of multiple controls! 
Although I’d personally like to see multiple controls disappear from the face of the earth, it might be good to make provision for them, since many events (including CCA) still use them. Perhaps “40/90 SD/30, d5” would be good if the same delay (or the same increment) is used for both controls, or “40/90 d0, SD/30 d5” in the case where (shudder) the two delays are different (or one of them is zero).
Bill Smythe
Anyone know how many clocks can be set with different delay/increment for each separate time control–Example: 40/90 d0, 30/60 d5, SD/30 d5? (as if that is even common?!).
I think all reasonably recent Chronos models can do this, at least to some extent. Even my very old (ca 1996) model, with a switch on the bottom, has a mode for this, provided there are only two controls and the first is d0. For example it could handle 40/90 d0, SD/30 d5.
The DGT North American can also do this (or at least with increment instead of delay), as we players found out the hard way in a major tournament a while back. The chief organizer, who furnished the clocks, was out of town that weekend, and one of his TDs, the one who set all the clocks, didn’t get the memo. The control was supposed to be 40/90 SD/30 inc/30, but the TD had set them for 40/90 inc/0, SD/30 inc/30. All the players, a few minutes into the first round, realized there was a problem, and another TD had to stop all the games and reset all the clocks, causing about a 20-minute delay.
Having different delays (or different increments) in multiple controls, or having the delay or increment in effect only in the final control, is of course a TERRIBLE idea for a whole bunch of reasons.
Bill Smythe