Post if you normally uses a digital clock, for skittles/club play, but occasionally use a analog clock just for old times sake.
Just curious if anybody does that just to remember how it used to be in the old days. With all the options with digital clocks nowadays, an analog clock must seem like the days of the dinosaurs.
I suppose there was a years long window between the introduction of digital clocks and it becoming more or less the industry standard and the massive decline of analog clocks, but now that it’s 2017, there is an entire generation of players that probably never used, or rarely used the analog clocks. I’m sure cheap analog clocks are still used by clubs with lots of young players, but I’d gander that there’s even less of those nowadays since cheap digital clocks are available and hardly much more than a mechanical clock.
I was looking at the INSA mechanical clock. I might get one. They look nice and I’d use it occasionally just to have a “blast from the past”. Back when a clock could be as a weapon,. I drew or won a few games against higher players in the old days just by making the game position overly complicated, drawish, and somewhat blocked, so that time itself was a major issue for the opponent. :mrgreen:
I don’t really miss those days though. It was a huge change though for people used to using time as a weapon in games. I grew up in that era, so no longer winning games on time, as an actual strategy, was a major letdown.
Offhand, is increment or delay the normal now in tournaments? Seems like a small increment would actually be better, although I can why tournaments might use delay in order minimize the chance the next round would get started late.
I love analogue clocks and I love my INSA even though it is one with the plastic case. I’m planning to by one in a wood case, but there a BHB with a tilt back in mahogany online that is calling out my name every night…that said, I also very much like my Chronos GS now that the learning curve for setting it is complete.
I use an analog clock for blitz occasionally. At first I was skeptical of the use of delay until I lost a couple of games when the egregious Allegro without delay first began. Losing a lost game on time is one thing, but when one loses a couple of won positions because you lack the time to win them that was too much. I purchased a delay capable clock.
If one were to buy an analog clock, the Insa with the two minute inset showing 15 second segments is the clock to get. At least there is some chance of knowing how much time you have left. The BHB was notoriously hard to set well. It was one of the reasons for adding a minute to the analog clock to account for discrepancies in the clocks.
Any increment under 30 seconds should be banned. You must have time to write the moves down as well as think. If you are going to demand writing, then you cannot shorten the increment time.
Increment is better than delay, buy it really only works in one round per day events, or in two round per day events where you can put a significant amount of time, at least two hours, between rounds.
I have helped out at a local senior center that is starting a chess club, and for them I have donated a few old BHB’s that I had gathering dust in the basement. Electronic clocks have many advantages over analog clocks, but one they don’t have is ease of operation. Most of them have thick instruction manuals, and the oldsters don’t want to have to figure them out. The BHB’s are better for them.
US Chess rules require scorekeeping when either player has less than five minutes only if there is an increment or delay of at least 30 seconds. Fortunately, US Chess rules align with Mr. Magar’s preference here.
FWIW, I enjoy blitz tournaments at G/5;+2. Directing, that is.
When I was thinking about having to worry about scheduling rounds, I was thinking more in the realm of the 1 day events with 30 minutes per game + 5 second delay/increment. I should’ve clarified that in my original post.
-I know you were asking Relya, but it seemed relevant to me to clarify what I was thinking in the OP.
If your first round starts at 10 am and is G/120, inc./30, then the round will end at 2:00 plus whatever time has been added by the increment. If your next round is scheduled to start any earlier than 4:00 pm you are running a serious risk of having a long running game hold up the next round. Even 4:00 is cutting it closer than would be my preference. If we could go back to adjournments this would be less of an issue. Sadly, (or not) those days are long gone.
As it happens, I’ve run perhaps 30 events at 40/90,SD/30;+30, which is more or less the same. I’ve had about three games go longer than five hours. Of course in July, I had a R+P vs. R ending that went 145 moves. 4:00 round started 25 minutes late. I probably should have adjourned the game. Why do you think adjournments are long gone?
Is there anything in there rules probity adjourning a game prior to complecof the first (in this case only) time control? If not, it’s a logical idea in this rare case.
I started playing in the 70’s with analog clocks. Sorry…sometimes newer is better. I don’t miss then at all! Trying to figure out whether you had 2 minutes or 15 seconds left by the position of the red flag was something only Walter Browne had down to a science. As far as increment or delay, I play mostly in CCA events (using delay) but I’d actually much rather play with increments. CCA – When are you going to change??
When Bill Goichberg isn’t running CCA anymore. Bill is fundamentally opposed to increment on principle. He believes strongly that your remaining time should never increase.
