Pave the way for increment!

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Two forms of time addback are common in today’s tournaments throughout the world. One is non-cumulative addback, also known as “delay”, “Adagio”, or “Bronstein”. The other is cumulative addback, also known as “increment”, “Fischer”, or “FIDE”. Delay is far more common in the USA, while increment is taking hold elsewhere in the world.

The standard abbreviations in the TLA section of Chess Life, as well as USCF tournament rules, are highly biased in favor of delay over increment. For example, the rules state that a 5-second delay is standard in tournaments where there is sudden death in any time control, even if no delay is specified in the TLA. Further, there is a standard abbreviation (listed on the first page of Tournament Life) for delay, but none for increment.

Chess Life’s TLA section ought to be made be more increment-friendly, so that organizers who wish to try this option will not feel intimidated. I suggest the following changes:

  1. Change the abbreviation for delay from T/Dx to d/x, where x is the number of seconds. For one thing, T/D stands for the atrociously redundant phrase “time delay”. What other kind of delay is there? Height delay? Weight delay?

  2. Add a new abbreviation, inc/x, where again x is the number of seconds. For example, inc/30 would specify an increment (cumulative addback) of 30 seconds.

  3. Add a mention that a 5-second delay is the standard for tournaments ending in a sudden death control, unless specified otherwise using one of the above abbreviations. This mention could be inserted immediately before the explanation that “The tournament director has the right to shorten the basic time control” etc.

At present, nobody seems to use the TLA abbreviation for delay, because 5 seconds is the default anyway. The new abbreviation could be used to specify a delay other than 5 seconds. For example, “G/90, d/7” would specify a 7-second delay, or “G/90, d/0” (heaven forbid) would mean there is no delay. I hope nobody starts using the latter option, but if they do, the proposed abbreviation would give them a convenient way of complying with the requirement that major deviations from standard rules be announced in pre-tournament publicity.

With the changes suggested above, “G/90, inc/30” would mean game in 90 minutes with an increment of 30 seconds. “G/90, d/5” would mean game in 90 minutes with a delay of 5 seconds. “G/90” by itself would, in this case, mean the same thing, as the default would continue to be a 5-second delay whenever no information to the contrary is given.

Bill Smythe

2

Dear Bill:

Can understand the idea, some players do have their clocks like mine a Chronos II – for giving more time to the player. Some will count down then after the player makes their move give back 5 seconds or when the clock is punched gives five seconds on the clock. Would not have a problem if the person gets back their time if they do make their move in the five second window or the whole five seconds after taking the time to make a rational judgement move on the board.

Have noticed like AD-1, AD-2, AD-3 and AD-4, when a person would get 15 seconds at the start of the move and if the person on the second move would go back to the start of their time if they taken less then 15 seconds. Or the AN-1A were a person gets 15 seconds when the clock is set at 5:00, when at one time thought of having my pre-set set to 2 seconds with the time control of G/5.

Do not have a problem if the owner of the clock use any of the programs that are used on the Chronos if the person has it set at 5 seconds for time controls of G/30 or slower or 3 seconds if the time control is between G/10 and G/29; would inform the players if it is a blitz that 2 seconds time delay would not be accepted at my events – as in blitz I cannot tell the players to set the clock at G/4 (t/d 2) as nothing slower then G/5 is rated would be unfair to one board that has a time delay clock and the other board does not – as both have the clock set at G/5. As the board with time delay with 2 seconds would get 1 minute more time for each 30 moves they make on the chess board, as most chess games do end around 30 to 60 moves then with blitz the players play on till checkmate could make a G/5 game be a G/6 or G/7 event; therefore making a blitz game with time delay give the players ten to twenty percent or more time on the clock.

Have seen a few players use the form you talk before but they had it set with 5 seconds: would not have a problem if the owner of the clock use this or in that matter the other player make a claim that the clock set is illegal. Do know that they are first set at 15 seconds as the Chronos clocks can for most of the programing go up to 9 seconds as a delay. Would not let a player use a clock that gives back 30 seconds on the clock as the time delay is fixed for the tournament. It would not be fair if one board set the (t/d 5) then say the other board set it at (t/d 6) or in that matter (t/d 30) as most clocks are unable to have time delay – or in that matter some clocks can not change the delay to be fixed at (t/d 5).

At first when time delay became legal like the idea, did like the school of thought of time delay. As a player like the idea that 5 seconds is given to me to make a move, as 5 seconds is the amount of time from moving or capturing during my move; or gives me the 5 seconds when my move was forced before the other player made the move given me no lost amount of time or only a second or two.

As a tournament director do have some ethical problems with time delay, as it does take care of the problem with a director needing to make a ruling on 14H Claim of insufficient losing chances in sudden death; as on one board that used during the whole game a time delay clock so that board can not make a claim of insufficient losing chances or the other board that did not use a time delay clock has the right to make a claim of insufficient losing chances. Then the other issue for taking time away from the clock to give balance, as it is common for a G/60 to make the time control G/55 with (t/d 5) but can not have a G/5 without time delay be equal to a G/5 (t/d 2) unless I make the blitz events be without time delay but accepted to have time delayed allowed when the clock are set at classical ratings – G/30 or slower. Then if telling someone to set the clock at G/55 (t/d 5), (5 seconds / 60 seconds = 12 moves per minute if all 12 moves used 5 seconds) then would get 12 moves per minute, (5 minutes x 12 moves = 60 moves) as asking the players to take 5 minutes off the clock they would need to make 60 moves to be equal to a board that did not use time delay. If the game last longer the 60 moves then one board gains more time on the clock then a different board that never used time delay; on the other had if the game did not use 60 moves on the clock then they lost time on the board then a board that did not have time delay – as it is move common to have a game be under 60 moves the players that use time control are the ones that lose more time then a different board that does not use time delay.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

3

Hold on just a cotton-pickin’ minute, Doug.

The AD (Adagio) modes on the Chronos are Bronstein. The AN modes are straight delay. They are mathematically equivalent. Some other modes (I don’t know what they might be called on all the Chronos models) are increment. It is important not to let players get away with increment if it is not specified in advance. The likely result, if increment is used “sneakily”, is a loud protest from the opponent when he discovers, during the final time-scramble, that his opponent’s time is INCREASING with each move.

And game/4 with a 2-second delay IS legal as USCF blitz. The rules go out of their way to explain the analogous situation with regular ratings – that the TD has the right to shorten the basic control by up to 5 minutes when a 5-second delay is used, even if (for example) the main control is thus reduced from game/30 to (the otherwise illegal) game/25.

As for fairness to the players in allowing Insufficient Losing Chances claims only in games without a delay, the answer to this is to respond to virtually all such claims by substituting a delay clock. That way, nobody is slighted. As to reducing the claimant’s time, that can be justified in two ways: (1) The time would have been reduced anyway, had a delay clock been used from the outset; and (2) That’s part of the cost of making a claim – a penalty, if you wish, for not furnishing a delay clock to begin with. You mentioned (1), but (2) is valid also.

Bill Smythe

4

They are almost equivalent, but not quite. There is a difference if the player’s remaining time is under five seconds.

5

John,

Delay mode and Bronstein mode ARE totally equivalent, on one condition: that 5 seconds are added to both sides, on a one-time basis, at the start of the game in Bronstein mode. For example, game/60 with a 5-second delay is mathematically equivalent to game/60:05 with a 5-second Bronstein.

The Chronos, recognizing this, automatically adds 5 seconds to both sides at the start of the game, in its Bronstein (Adagio) modes (AD-n). Other clock brands, however, may not do this.

Thus, the difference (if there is one) occurs in the first 5 seconds, not the last 5. In fact, in Bronstein mode it is impossible to get the clock below 5 seconds (unless the player has flagged and is at 0 seconds) because, if there are fewer than 5 seconds remaining when the player presses his clock, time will be added when he presses, bringing his total back over 5 seconds.

Likewise, in delay mode, if the clock shows 2 seconds after the player has moved, he actually has 7 seconds to make his next move, because of the delay.

An easy way to see that delay and Bronstein are mathematically equivalent is to perform the following “thought experiment” involving a game with two clocks, one set to game/60 with a 5-second delay, the other set to game/60:05 with a 5-second Bronstein. (The thought experiment works best on the Chronos using CH-A1 for delay and AD-1 for Bronstein. On the older Chronos with a switch on the bottom, use CH-A2 for delay.)

  1. White’s clock is started. The delay clock shows 60:00 and 5 seconds. The Bronstein clock shows 60:05. Either way, white has 60 minutes and 5 seconds to make his first move before he flags.

  2. White uses 20 minutes for his first move. Just before he presses his clock, the delay clock shows 40:05 and 0 seconds (he has used up 5 delay seconds plus 19:55 main minutes/seconds). The Bronstein clock shows 40:05 (twenty minutes less than the original 60:05).

  3. White presses his clock. The delay clock now shows 40:05 and 5 seconds. The Bronstein clock adds 5 seconds, so it now shows 40:10. Either way, white now has 40:10 remaining to play his second move before he flags.

  4. Black, also a slow player, also takes 20 minutes for his first move. After he moves and presses his clock, his clocks show 40:05 and 5 seconds, and 40:10, just as white’s did.

  5. White takes only 2 seconds to play his second move. Just before he presses his clock, the delay clock shows 40:05 and 3 seconds, while the Bronstein shows 40:08.

  6. After white presses his clock, the delay clock now shows 40:05 and 5 seconds, while the Bronstein adds back the 2 seconds and shows 40:10. Again, either way, white has 40:10 remaining for his third move.

  7. Black uses up 40:08 of his remaining 40:10 on his second move. On the delay clock, this represents 5 seconds of delay plus 40:03 of main time, so that his delay clock will read :02 of main time and 0 of delay time just before he presses his clock. The Bronstein clock at this point will read :02.

  8. Black presses his clock. The delay clock now shows :02 and 5 seconds. The Bronstein, adding 5 seconds, now shows :07.

  9. White, following black’s lead, also uses 40:08 of his remaining 40:10. As with black, after white presses his clock, his clocks show :02 and 5 seconds, and :07.

  10. Black, on his third move, uses 4 seconds. Before he presses his clock, his clocks show :02 and 1 second, and :03. After he presses his clock, his clocks show :02 and 5 seconds, and :07. Again, black still has 7 seconds remaining for his next move.

  11. White, on his fourth, uses 6 seconds. Before he presses his clock, his clocks show :01 and 0 seconds, and :01. After he presses, the clocks will show :01 and 5 seconds, and :06.

  12. On black’s fourth move, he unfortunately takes 8 seconds. After 7 seconds, the delay clock shows :00 and 0 seconds (he has flagged), and the Bronstein shows :00 (he has flagged). After 1 more second when black presses his clock, the delay clock still shows :00 and 0 (it does not show 5 seconds after a flag), while the Bronstein still shows :00 (it does not add back time after a flag).

Q.E.D. Or, in tabular form:

A. B:BB CC:CC D EE:EE F:FF GG:GG H II:II

  1. 00:00 60:00 5 60:05 00:00 60:00 5 60:05
  2. 20:00 40:05 5 40:10 20:00 40:05 5 40:10
  3. 00:02 40:05 5 40:10 40:08 00:02 5 00:07
  4. 40:08 00:02 5 00:07 00:04 00:02 5 00:07
  5. 00:06 00:01 5 00:06 00:08 00:00 0 00:00

Columns are:

A - Move number.

B - Time consumed by white.

C-D-E - Time shown on white’s clocks after white’s move. Delay clock shows main time C and delay D. Bronstein clock shows time E.

F - Time consumed by black.

G-H-I - Time shown on black’s clocks after black’s move. Delay clock shows main time G and delay H. Bronstein clock shows time I.

Bill Smythe

6

On the Chronos the adagio mode, called AD - 1, AD - 2, AD -3 and AD -4 does call itself delay mode – except that it gives the player more time at the start of the first move. This mode can be set from zero seconds up to ninty-nine seconds – the reason for this kind of mode as like the ones that are more common when both players can see the five seconds – the delay time (myself would use) like chess andante mode I (CH - A1) with one time control or chess andante mode II (CH-A2) with two time controls. With the adagio mode, if set at 5 seconds the players on the first move shall gain 5 seconds during the first move; if they play a move that is less then five seconds for each move, then the time will be restored to the time before the move started; the first move for a G/30 would be 30:05, if they do make a move less then 5 seconds: they will have the time of 30:05. If on the other hand they get the five seconds at the start of the move, then one player use the delay of five seconds plus 5 seconds of a total of 10 seconds, after the move the clock will add back 5 seconds onto the clock.

There is also the sudden death and delay I (DL - SD1) at the owner of the clock can still set the delay from zero seconds to 9:59 seconds, the problem with this mode like other modes it has flashing dots – the owner of the clock could set the delay for himself at 8 seconds, the other player at 5 seconds; if the owner of the clock does cheat with more seconds, would have to make it so the other player would not be asking why the time of the clock is not moving. If the owner of the clock set the clock with 9:59 as a delay after a number of moves, the other player would be asking why the clock is not moving, the charge of cheating would be brought up: if on the other hand with a 8 second delay would not be noticed, or be noticed for the player for asking the director to check the clock.

Blitz with the two second delay, very sure under the rules that nothing can be rated under five minutes; with the debate that delay can take five percent off from the clock, then still be thought of as a G/5. Making a debate that G /5 with a time delay is still ratable as it is thought of as G / 5 with the time delay. With blitz being five minutes, would be a total of 300 seconds or five minutes. With 5% of 300 seconds would be 15 seconds. You would have a clock set at 4:45 (t/d 2), if that can be done with all chess clock would not be a problem, as some clocks can not be set with seconds then having all clocks set this way would have some clocks be not acceptable and others non-standard. Even if you can have it set at G / 4.45 (t/d 2) both players would gain more time on a delay clock after they make 8 moves as 2 x 8 = 16 seconds; when the standard of setting a G / 60 clock at G / 55 (t/d 5) would be 5 x 60 = 300 or five minutes before both players start to gain more time. As G / 5 at G / 4:45 (t/d 2) -vs- G / 60 at G / 55 (t/d 5) would be a difference of 7 1/2 moves ( 2 seconds into 15 seconds = 7 1/2 movers) into 60 moves would be a factor off 8 or 800 percent difference. As my clock (Chronos II) can be set at G / 4:45 (t/d 2) could be set as board A, some other clock as board B: that can not be set with seconds on the clock with time delay, then board B would get 15 seconds more time then board A because it can be set with time delay and show seconds.

With most chess clocks the director would need to round to the whole number, as the director would need to round to the closes whole number, as 5 percent of 5 minutes would be 4:45 the director would still have to make it G/5 for the chess clocks with time delay. Then delay clocks would always get 2 seconds more time, then a clock that is set at G / 5 without time delay. Even if the director does use G / 4 (t/d 2) would be a difference of twenty percent then the standard of five percent; what player that goes to a G / 60 event would want accept G / 40 (t/d 5), if we used this as a standard it would be 240 moves before both players would gain more time on the clock, as blitz use time delay of 2 then 5 then it would 600 moves before both players gain more time if using 2 second delay.

With G / 90, the director would cut the time down to G / 85 (t/d 5) as the 60 move theory works. Sixty is the number they are looking for, as the idea that a game would be finnished around the 60th move, if the game ends before 60 moves it ended because of checkmate, resigning or accepting a draw, ect. If you win your game before 60 moves it was not your falt the game ended, if you lose the game it was not the falt of the clock, if you accpeted a draw then it was you and the other player that accpeted a draw or one player forced a draw – it is not the clock that the players could not break 60 moves. If you break over 60 moves and both players did use the 5 second delay from the clock, then you would be gaining more time from the clock, with 60 moves performed, both players are in a end game, time delay is only needed during the end game not during the opening or middle game, time delay was designed for the end game not the opening or middle game

With a time delay with blitz, it is not a rational argument to use time delay as it is not or can be equal to G / 30 as G / 25 (t/d 5); or G / 60 as G / 55 (t/d 5); or G / 90 as G / 85 (t/d 5) – as it is not the 60 moves to equal 5 minutes. If we take it to blitz on the idea of the 60 moves, as blitz is a two second delay would make the time delay for a G / 5 as G / 4 (t/d 2): as 2 seconds into 60 seconds equals 30 moves; if sending it to G / 3 (t/d 2) it would 2 seconds into 120 seconds equals 60 moves.

A) G / 5 as G / 3 (t/d 2) = 2 seconds into 120 seconds = 60 moves (40 percent time difference).
B) G / 10 as G / 7 (t/d 3) = 3 seconds into 180 seconds = 60 moves (30 percent time difference).
C) G / 10 as G / 8 (t/d 3) = 3 seonds into 120 seconds = 40 moves (20 percent time difference).
D) G / 10 as G / 9 (t/d 3) = 3 seconds into 60 seconds = 20 moves (10 percent time difference).
E) G / 30 as G / 25 (t/d 5) = 5 seconds into 300 seconds = 60 moves (10 percent time difference).
F) G / 60 as G / 55 (t/d 5) = 5 seconds into 300 seconds = 60 moves (5 percent time difference).

If you want to make G / 5 like the classical time difference with the difference of time to equal 60 moves before you are equal with the amount of time given back, then you would have to set the blitz game to G / 3 (t/d 2). As the director can have a G / 10 event be between G / 7 up to G / 9 with a time delay of 3 seconds most directors have the clock set at G / 7 (t/d 3). This is the reason for not wanting to have delay clocks during a blitz event, in my event will not use delay during the G / 5 event. Very sure nothing can be rated below G / 5 in the first place, even if you say that G / 5 is equal to G / 4 (t/d2), as made my case that this time control is unfair.

As a player do like time delay, as a director have a number of problems with it – it is not the question of who is who between the boards, that is mystery until the parings are up – it is how the clocks are set between board A and board B that can be unequal without asking how the game will end. Would have to say would not let time delay be in a G/5 event even if it was legal to take time off the clock as 20 or 40 percent of the total time just to make the 60 move theory fit to a classical time control; then would have ethical problems to say being a director of a classical time control to let time delay be used – with time delay left with a duelist answer. To be fair, would say that a G / 5 would be set at G / 3 (t/d 2) quick event take away 3 minutes with a three second delay and a classical with 5 minutes with a 5 second delay, if it is one time control.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

7

Delay mode and Bronstein mode ARE totally equivalent, on one condition: that 5 seconds are added to both sides, on a one-time basis, at the start of the game in Bronstein mode. For example, game/60 with a 5-second delay is mathematically equivalent to game/60:05 with a 5-second Bronstein.>>

This may be true in the abstract, assuming the player is able and willing to set the clock at 2:00:05 at the start. But consider it from the player’s point of view. Two players each have five seconds left. One is using delay, the other is using Bronstein. The delay-player’s clock won’t start for five seconds, so he really has ten seconds to make his move. The Bronstein-player must make his move within five seconds or forfeit. The distinction is important because the players who most strongly argue for digital clocks (as opposed to the directors, who want to reduce their workload) argue precision and accuracy. Knowing that you have five seconds, rather than “no space between the flag and the hour,” can enable a good player to find a better move. The time-pressure dynamic is slightly different between the two methods, even though most of the time they perform identically.

8

How would I set my Chronos to increment? I know some tournaments, such as New York Masters, prefer this to delay.

9

For increment on the older Chronos, with the switch on the bottom, try mode CH-P3. I don’t know about the newer models, but probably one or more of the CH-Pn modes will do the trick.

Bill Smythe

10

Doug, Doug, Doug.

In your post of July 11 at 1:50 pm, you are apparently confusing two unrelated rules – the rule about reducing main time to compensate for delay time, and the “rule” (or scholastic convention) about reducing time to compensate for a player who is not keeping score. “Five percent” (or any other percent) has NOTHING to do with the delay rule.

An organizer is allowed to reduce the main time, in minutes, by up to the delay time, in seconds, in games using a delay. Thus, a regular-rated game with a 5-second delay can be as fast as game/25. A quick-rated game with a 3-second delay can be as fast as game/7. A blitz game with a 2-second delay can be as fast as game/3.

Go ahead and run your game/4, 2-second delay blitz tournament if you wish. USCF will rate it as blitz, no problem.

As for fairness to the players, all you need to do is declare a delay clock preferred equipment, if set for a 2-second delay. Either player who furnishes such a clock would have the right to insist on the delay. The only players at a disadvantage would be those who are unwilling to furnish up-to-date equipment.

Bill Smythe

11

Apparently John Hillery and I agree that delay and Bronstein are equivalent mathematically, but that the two may have very different psychological effects on the players.

At any given point in the game, having N seconds showing on a delay clock is the same as having N+5 seconds showing on a Bronstein clock. The difference can, of course, confuse players near the time control.

Some tournaments specify that a clock with “true” delay is preferred over one with Bronstein (but that the latter is still preferable to one with neither). This is probably a good rule designed to eliminate the confusion and the resulting arguments.

Bill Smythe

12

Bill, most players make a general argument that with time delay to take off 5 percent of time, myself use the rule of (X time delay into X minutes = 60 moves). The federation in my judgement is unclear that time even with delay could equal five minutes, like G / 3 (t/d2) = G / 5.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

13

Well, Doug, USCF makes it VERY clear that game/25 d/5 is rateable under the regular system – they even use this as one of their specific examples. I believe they do the same with game/7 d/3 as Quick-rated. So why not also game/3 d/2 as Blitz?

Bill Smythe

14

The reason for a delay mode on the chess clock, was they delay clock was to be used during the end game not the opening or the middle game. As with classical time take 5 minutes away would be (5 seconds into 5 minutes = 60 moves) or for quick (3 seconds into 3 minutes = 60 moves). Even with a clock set at G / 7 (t/d 3) would not have a problem to get 60 moves before they gain the right to use the three seconds on the clock. The reason that some directors like the players use a time delay on the clock as they would not have to think of making a rule on 14H.

When going down in time on blitz, only makes the very strong and the ones that have the best eye to hand combation win the game. Some players like to play blitz in G / 1 when both players only have one minute on the clock. With a G / 3 (t/d 2) only makes the players that have better hand to eye skills be able to win. Do know the debate that a player that plays at slower time controls that plays blitz only damage their slower time controls, or a person that plays blitz has problems in slower time controls.

When players see that the clock was turned down for a G / 60 to have G / 55 (t/d 5) they get into a mind set that they only have 55 minutes on the clock, even with time delay they will get the 5 minutes back after they both make 60 moves on the board. If a player has only 5 minutes on the clock after the 8th moves its is not the error of the clock – its the players time managment that is at error. If the player see a blitz clock at G / 3 (t/d 2) some players will think they only have 3 minutes on the clock but would not get their time back till they both make 60 moves on the board.

Do know a number of one chess club, The Greater Toledo Chess Club that a person that is the owner of a dime delay chess clock must have all the games be on time delay. Some other clubs are the same way, myself would never have a blitz event with time delay. If you want to have it that way with G / 3 (t/d 2) would not go to the event. Would not trust the idea of time delay in a blitz game.

Earnest,
Douglas M. Forsythe, local td

15

For example, “G/90, d/7” would specify a 7-second delay, or “G/90, d/0” (heaven forbid) would mean there is no delay.
<<

Heaven forbid? Why is the delay option so important that you say this? In fact, I seem to recall several tournaments here on Long Island where the TLA states that “rule 14H will not be used.” In these same TLAs I think there something about no delay too - I could be wrong…

webcom.com/timm/chess/freeport/welcome.html
webcom.com/timm/chess/nassau/schedule.html

Regards,
AJG

16

Rule 14H is only indirectly related to the delay, or lack thereof.

In the first place, rule 14H cannot be used in games where there IS a delay, so if the organizer says 14H will not be used, it could just be a way of encouraging players to bring delay-capable clocks.

Second, substituting a delay clock is one option available to TDs when confronted with a 14H claim. TDs tend to do this when they want the game to be decided over the board, by the players, rather than by TD judgment.

Third, there are still a few organizers (Neanderthals, in my opinion) who don’t like the delay (or increment) AND don’t like 14H claims either. These are the ones who are likely to announce no delay and no 14H.

A sudden death game, played without a delay, without an increment, and without 14H claims being allowed, creates a strong possibility that the game may be decided by the clock alone, not by the position or by the skills of the players. For example, white may have a light-square bishop and a pawn on a light square, while black has a dark-square bishop and a pawn on a dark square, with the pawns locked against each other and the bishops defending the pawns from the front. This, of course, is a dead draw, if the players have ANY skill at all (even players rated 500 would be able to hold such a position, from either side). If there are only a few seconds left on each clock, the lack of a delay and the lack of 14H would mean that the game would be reduced to a contest of manual dexterity, to see who could move fastest and press the clock fastest.

This kind of situation, regarded as highly undesirable by most responsible tournament organizers, directors, and players, was addressed originally by 14H, and later by the delay clock. Fortunately, by now just about everybody is on board with the delay, so that players can now expect the delay to be in use whenever they go to a tournament, and organizers can expect that players will be familiar with the concept.

So that’s the way it is, nowadays. It is definitely NOT time to turn back the clock – except for the extra 5 seconds each player gets on each move. :slight_smile:

Bill Smythe

17

OK, I see the rational behind the 14H and the delay as you explain it, thanx.

BTW, the Freeport club is run by Local TD Tim Mirabile and the Nassau club is run by National TD Harold Stenzel. You very often find Tim and Harold at the same event helping as TDs and/or playing. Stenzel is also a FIDE International Arbiter. I don’t think these guys are neandertals, so what is their motivation here for demanding no delay and no 14H?

Regards,
AJG

18

Time delay and 14H are slightly different questions, though obviously related. The problem with 14H is obvious – it allows the game to be decided by TD action, and no matter how goldbergery you put in the rules, this is not going to be enforced the same way by every TD.

The latest answer to this is the time delay clock. There are still some TDs (and players) who dislike time delay, and the objections fall into three or four categories:

  1. Time delay is bad because, until everyone has a time delay clock (and the same kind of time delay clock), the playing conditions are unequal. This is, of course, true, but I’m afraid that horse has left the barn.

  2. Time delay is bad per se. There aren’t too many supporters of this left, and I suppose they could be characterized as “Neanderthals.”

  3. The players are being penalized to solve a problem created by the organizers. The logic of this objection is that sudden-death was instituted to eliminate long games and adjournments, but it created new problems which the organizers should have thought through in advance. Now we’re telling the players they have to buy new clocks and adopt new procedures to clean up the mess. I sympathize with this position in the abstract, but the fact is that most players do not want to get rid of sudden-death, nor do they object much to time delay clocks.

  4. Players should not be forced to use new equipment by organizer fiat. I agree with this one, though I’m not fanatical about it. (My tournaments use a rule variation which gives Black the choice of standard equipment including time-delay clocks.) There are still a fair number of players around who are under the impression that a) Black always has the choice and b) they cannot be forced tio use a digital clock. This problem will eventually solve itself as the BHBs wear out.

19

<< There are still a fair number of players around who are under the impression that a) Black always has the choice and b) they cannot be forced tio use a digital clock. This problem will eventually solve itself as the BHBs wear out.>>

What? I thought it was a given that Black had the choice of equipment.

My stand is that I don’t care what kind of clock is being used if my opponent has some reason for using his instead of my own. As long as they know how to set it properly it doesn’t matter to me. Of course, I don’t see that there’s any way of being sure my opponent has set it properly, so I have to take his word for it, don’t I? Unless I read his instruction manual and check out his clock I have no way of knowing if I’m being cheated of time or if he just doesn’t know how to set it. Given the confusion I’ve seen in the posts here, I can imagine it’s hard to verify correct clock settings.

As for me, I’ll always take an analog clock over digital any time. My son has a digital, but thank goodness it keeps time without any increments or delays. I still haven’t figured out why all the fuss about using them to begin with. I’d feel better if it meant I could get a clock for under $25, but it hasn’t happened with analogs and it hasn’t happened with digitals.

Radishes

20

Unless this was intended as irony, it confirms something I’ve been arguing with the Rules Committee for years. Under the current rules (this goes back to about 1995) Black does not have the choice – digital time delay clocks take precedence, and analog takes precedence over non-time-delay digital. Black only has the choice if both players have the same kind of clock. See 42D. (Please do not cite 42C. This applies only to games “without sudden death,” and I defy anyone to find a tournament these days which does not have any sudden-death time control.) Frankly, I think players who argue about which clock to use would be better advised to spend their time studying Rook endings, but they’re not going to stop.