I am considering submitting the following Advance Delegate Motion for the 2011 Annual Delegates Meeting. Comments are welcome.
Bob Messenger
Massachusetts Delegate
In Rule 5F, change the sentence “For Quick Chess (G/10 to G/29) the standard delay is three seconds, and for Blitz Chess (G/5) two seconds.” to read:
“For Quick Chess (G/5 to G/29) the standard delay is three seconds. For Blitz Chess the standard time control is G/5 with no delay.”
This ADM comes from a discussion in the topic “Question re 8-minute chess game ruling” in this forum. The cited sentence in Rule 5F should be changed to reflect the changes to Rule 5C (Quick Chess) and Chapter 11 (Blitz Chess).
This reflects what is in the rules defining blitz at the moment and is a good idea, imo
The main problem here has nothing to do with the default delay, or lack thereof.
There should be a continuum of time controls. At the break between regular and quick, we have exactly that – 30 minutes or more is regular, 29 or less is quick.
By contrast, between quick and blitz there is a no-man’s land, G/6 through G/9. To correct this, blitz should be defined as G/5 through G/9.
Bill Smythe
Or quick should be defined as G/6-G/29 and blitz left at 5-0. Or quick continues until G/59 and Regular starts at G/60? But this then becomes a completely different thread
Or G/6 through G/9 should be FORBIDDEN! 
Yes, the chess police should give tickets for playing G/8 
tap tap “Sir, do you know how fast you were going?”
At the time the 5th edition rulebook was published there was a discontinuity, as shown by the existing rule 5F that you quoted. Blitz Chess was G/5, Quick Chess was G/10 through G/29, and G/6 through G/9 were undefined. Subsequently rule 5C and the blitz rules were changed, but due to an apparent oversight rule 5F wasn’t changed to reflect this. That’s the problem that my proposed ADM is intended to correct: to change 5F to conform to the current 5C and blitz rules.
Under the current rules there is an overlap. The new rule 5C says that “Quick Chess includes time limits from G/5 to less than G/30.” The new blitz rules (Chapter 11) say “Blitz Chess … is a variant defined as a single, sudden death time control from 1 to 10 minutes… Standard time control (TC) [for] blitz is G/5 with no delay.”
Anything from 1-4 minutes is referring to internet chess as 5-0 is the fastest time control that can be USCF rated. We should probably try to reword 1-4 minutes NOT being included into this because it is confusing, not being ratable. 3/2 was eventually ruled as not ratable as well
So the first sentence in Chapter 11 should be changed to define Blitz Chess as “a single, sudden death time control from 5 to 10 minutes”?
5 to 9.
Bill Smythe
Personally, I would prefer G/5 being blitz and only blitz and G/6-? being Quick, but I’d also like for blitz to have its own rating system as well.
That failed by a fairly close vote in Indianapolis. There were two reasons for that proposal:
1.) Blitz has its own rule system different than Quick, so to blend the two creates a hybrid rating that is less meaningful and Blending the two systems introduces error into both, like blending an apple and an orange and calling the result an orange.
2.) Blitz has a different culture and I knew people with 2000 Reg, 2200 Quick and 2400 blitz, the faster the better and this should be captured.
Mike
I agree with having separate rating systems for quick and blitz, but it’s not really that big a deal. Keep in mind that there are two separate distinctions here – the difference between quick and blitz rules on the one hand, and the difference between quick and blitz ratings on the other. It is possible to maintain the first distinction, while obscuring the second by combining the ratings.
Bill Smythe
Still trying to understand why rating 5.0 games under any system is a Good Thing. USCF has at least enough rating systems as is.
I play five-minute chess at a local club when no rated games are going on and folks just want to relax and have fun. We play clock-move, usually, though some guys prefer “touch-move with one take-back allowed; wink.”
Usually players will agree to a draw via mutual shrug when the position is a DEAD draw—such a K vs. K+RP—rather than have one side ‘lose’ on time. If you leave your King in check your opponent will re-start your clock immediately—and likely razz you about it for the rest of the night. I have never seen a King captured at our club.
THAT is what blitz chess should be: a way to have fun, unwind—and work on openings, tactics and moving quickly, for use in future serious games—which Blitz is not.
This is an old argument. I never joined WBCA even though I had friends who were WBCA members. (So don’t call me prejudiced.) The idea of merging ‘real’ chess rules with hyper-spazz caffeinated clock-smashing as seen in G/5.0 always seemed strange to me…but if Walter Browne made meal money from it and folks liked it for some reason…OK.
USCF should have nothing to do with it. I was shocked to learn on this Forum last year that capture-the-King and clock-move games have been Quick-rated ever since then-ED Bill Goichberg decreed that the threshold for Quick Chess would be lowered to G/5, after WBCA folded.
There are minimum standards that should apply for any game that is rated by USCF–at any time control.
At least five minutes on each clock, regardless of delay/increment. (I would prefer 10 minutes minimum.)
Touch-move applies.
If your opponent can’t hear you when you scream a draw offer at him, it’s too loud for ratable chess.
Overlooked checks are resolved by any agreed-upon means other than capture-the-King.
Mike Atkins and others say the above means we should add yet another rating system, for Blitz Chess. i.e.
A. create a Blitz system to replace WBCA ratings; rather than
B. have that subsumed into the Quick system.
I find A preferable to B…but just barely.
What is the point of rating G/5.0 games at all?
I’d support that because the current overlap between quick and blitz time controls is a potential source of confusion. Currently G/5 can be played under quick rules and G/10 under blitz rules, although I don’t know of anyone who is doing this.
I could propose this change in an ADM, but it would complicate the Rule 5F ADM that I proposed at the start of this topic. Even if the delegates don’t want to change the ranges of valid time controls for quick and blitz, they should change 5F to conform to the previous changes made to 5C and Chapter 11.
I’m not sure about this one. Every quick and blitz tournament that I’ve directed has used regular ratings for pairings and prizes, because they’re usually more accurate than quick ratings. If we can figure out how to make quick ratings accurate enough that they can actually be used for pairings and prizes in quick tournaments we can think about doing the same thing for blitz ratings.
ummm, because some people like rated blitz, because blitz ratings - pure blitz ratings mean more than quick ratings when playing rated games. Some people are much better in G/5 than they are in Quick. Imagine a National Blitz League played online sometime in the future, how cool would that be?
People can play regular chess for fun and in tournaments just like they can play blitz to relax and in tournaments. To each their own. I wouldn’t force others to play rated blitz, just like you shouldn’t deny them the chance to play because you don’t like it. The chances of creating a blitz rating is less than 50% so it is a pipe dream, but I can still dream 
Amen on nixing clock-move and capture-the-king.
As a matter of fact, I am dismayed that the word “blitz” has been hijacked to mean both of the above, along with illegal-move-loses (not just if it’s check) and no-delay-by-default. Blitz ought to mean civilized blitz, with a 2-second delay, touch-move, and handling illegal moves the same way as in quick or regular chess. Then let it be rated, either separately or as part of the quick system.
Bill Smythe
That would at least make it something other than a joke, true—but organizers or councils or committees would simply announce that at their events clock-move, capture-the-King and no-delay would be used.
All of which is OK, if they just want to have a fun tournament and maybe hand out a few trophies. My problem is pretending that such games bear sufficient resemblance to ‘real’ tournament chess that they are fit to be rated even as Quick.
To me it seems obvious they do not; it looks like others disagree.
I am revising this proposed ADM in light of my proposed change to rule 5C. The new wording is:
In Rule 5F, change the sentence “For Quick Chess (G/10 to G/29) the standard delay is three seconds, and for Blitz Chess (G/5) two seconds.” to read:
“For Quick Chess (G/6 to less than G/30) the standard delay is three seconds. For Blitz Chess the standard time control is G/5 with no delay.”
My intention is that if my proposed change to rule 5C is defeated I’ll amend this motion to change G/6 to G/5 in the first sentence.
I’ve changed the upper limit for Quick Chess from “G/29” to “less than G/30” to reflect the language in rule 5C.