5F1 I am referring to. Old man here, please don’t bash me.
(50/120 SD/30) This is referred to as a game using mixed time controls. Notice it does not specify any delay at all. But this rule states that you should “use a time delay clock set with a 5-second delay from the beginning of the game, if available.”
So therefore I am drawing the conclusion that is using mixed time controls even if it doesn’t state a delay in the advertisement or if the director says there is no delay you should use AND set the delay for 5 seconds otherwise you will be in violation of this rule?
Please don’t jump all over me as I just got my book and am devouring it as I am so excited to get back to chess after 40 years. I just want to make sure I do understand this 100% because it makes no sense to me why they just wouldn’t advertise the time control for d/5 vs. being understood.
Is this a correct statement?:
Any REGULAR GAME TIME CONTROL control WITH a SD would be mixed and would have to have a time delay of 5-seconds?
I wish I read my text books this fast while in school.
I don’t have the 6th edition yet. It sounds like something might have been missed in the transition between the 5th edition plus rulebook changes (http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/reports/RulebookChanges.pdf) and the 6th edition, or was overlooked when the 5th edition was amended. Rule 5B2 in the 5th edition rulebook changes document says “The organizer is to indicate the time control, including the delay or increment, in all advance publicity as minutes (mm) and seconds (ss), e.g. G/90 inc/30 (or +30); G/30 d/5; G/10 d/3; G/5 d/0.” Rule 5C’s TD Tip includes as an example 40/90 SD/30 inc/30. Certainly the intention was that even with a mixed time control the organizer doesn’t have to use d/5 and that the delay or increment, or lack of delay or increment, has to be advertised even if it’s d/5.
This is a theory and practice issue. Technically, the entire time control, including delay or increment, must be listed in the TLA and all advance publicity, and posted at the site and all that neat stuff. So, technically a time control listed as “G/60” or “40/90, SD/60” should be played with ‘no’ delay or increment.
The office is not supposed to accept TLAs that do not include delay/increment info—but there are plenty of tournaments that do not have TLAs these days. (Another change from Back in the Day, thanks to the Internet.)
In practice, any Regular-rated event that ends in SD will use a five-second delay from move one, unless it is clearly noted otherwise. Players have gotten used to that over the course of many years. For instance: poconoml.wix.com/poconochess#!about/c4nz
That’s online publicity for an upcoming local event run by a friend of mine. It lists “G/40” but everyone who shows up knows that means G/40 d5.
This tournament has no TLA. The TD/organizer is a great chess volunteer who has played rated chess for 30-plus years. He is also a Local TD, fully competent for that level in re pairings, rules disputes and tournament procedure.
When I raise issues like this one—Forum-fodder, a skeptic might say—he sort of tunes out…and that’s why the laudable idea that all time control info must be included for all rated events, all the time, everywhere…is a bit optimistic.
Please enjoy the Rulebook and keep asking questions.
I read it over a few times and just again right now. Sure is confusing because it is in the form of a “statement” and not an option.
Of course I am just a rookie here and this book will help me so much to proper procedure in a tournament. It’s a fun sport, just wish I had time to study when I was in my 20’s to 50’s. But hey just cause I am way over the hill doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy the game and get better.
Eric you posted as I was typing and didn’t see your response, it does clear it up. Logic tells me that is the way it is suppose to be. I think 5F1 should either be clarified or written over for the future. But I in no way am insulting the people who worked hard on this Sixth edition as I can see it is a labor of love. My hats off to all that were involved in its output.
Thanks Bob, I looked at all the categories & couldn’t make up my mind if it went here or all things chess. I hope all TD as well as Players get the new rule book and read that section. Maybe I am looking at it wrong. After all even my grand kids call me old man.
The rules require that FULL time control information be given, INCLUDING the increment/delay. (This requirement was clarified in Orlando, by making it clear that IF time control information is given then FULL time control information must be given. Chess Life and Chess Life Online TLAs must always have full tine control information, other types of pre-tournament publicity, like a calendar of upcoming events, do not always need to give time control information.)
There is still a default delay specified in the rules, I think it’s 5 seconds for regular/dual rated games, 3 seconds for quick rated-only games and (I THINK) 0 seconds for blitz games.
BUT, the organizer is still required to give FULL time control information whenever time control information is given, and that extends to on-site postings and verbal announcements.
In this imperfect world, sometimes it is necessary to have a rule covering situations where another rule is violated.
So –
“Pre-event publicity which includes time control informationmustalso specify increment or delayor the lack thereof– for example, G/60 d5, or G/60 d0.”
– also requires –
“If pre-event publicity violates the above by omitting specific mention of the increment time, delay time, or lack thereof, then d5, d3, or d0 shall be in effect depending on whether the event is regular-rated, quick-rated, or blitz-rated, respectively.”
I suspect explicitly stating the defaults that way (without EXTREME penalties for omitting full time control information) would lead to the Leavitt/Dubner effect.
University of Chicago economist Steven Leavitt has written several books, co-authored by Stephen Dubner, in which they have described a number of occasionally startling examples of unintended consequences.
In one of them, a study in Israel as I recall, a day care center was having problems with parents picking up their kids late. So, they instituted a policy to charge for late pickups.
The result: Even more parents started picking up their kids late.
There are other examples of this phenomenon.
I’ve seen several references to this as the Leavitt-Dubner effect. By imposing (usually) minor sanctions on the unwanted behavior, you encourage it.
The Leavitt/Dubner effect may be responsible for something organizers are already familiar with–late entries. I’ve personally held events where the on-site entry fee was more than twice the advance entry fee, it doesn’t always have the intended effect of getting player to enter early. (It will be interesting to see if the Millionaire Open experiences a late surge of entries despite rather hefty fee increases.)
OTOH, there are those of us who see the hefty penalty for not entering in advance and immediately pass over the tournament on principle. There are those with busy schedules, or have kids with busy schedules, who are not going to be able to know whether they can play in a tournament until the last minute. Charging a penalty for on site entry, not only in my opinion but also experience as a tournament organizer and player, costs entries. If I am going to be charged an extra $10 or $15, especially for what is likely to be a small local tournament, I would rather roll over in bed and sleep in than play. Of course, some organizers don’t realize this and grouse about how nobody shows up at their tournaments.
On time controls, I once attended a tournament where there was an insurrection over the lack of information on the time control. Just before the start of play, the TD announced that the games would be with no delay. The publicity was spare about the time. Since most of the players had gotten used to having delay, a big argument erupted. He held his ground, probably figuring that those of us who had driven a good distance would not leave. He said that he only had the room for a limited time. When a bunch of the locals threatened to leave, and we started to pack up our stuff, the TD finally relented. Hard to run a tournament when over two thirds withdraw and demand their money back. Even with the first round starting late because of the argument, the last round finished with 45 minutes to spare.
My advice is to enter in advance and withdraw if you aren’t able to play. Just make sure you’re able to give adequate notice before the first round is paired, so you don’t forfeit. Most organizers will give a full refund. An exception is CCA, which charges $15 for refunds, or you can use the refund as a credit to enter future CCA tournaments, in which case there is no service charge.
If everybody waited until the last minute then there would be a crush of entries and the first round would be unlikely to start on time. I’ve done tournaments where the advance entries accounted for more than 80% of the entries and there was barely room for the additional players.
I’ve done a lot of scholastics using advance entries only, with some of those having to turn away advance entries because of space considerations (they could have been 50% larger if they had the space). If you enter a tournament in advance and that prevents somebody else from entering then even giving advance notice that you would not be showing up may not result in an entry fee refund.
My experience has been the opposite. I’ve found that there are more players who having entered in advance show up to play largely because they have already entered. If they hadn’t entered in advance, then they would just roll over in bed and sleep. So having the advance entries not only gets more entries but also allows you to get everything started on time.
and am devouring it as I am so excited to get back to chess after 40 years. I just want to make sure I do understand this 100% because it makes no sense to me why they just wouldn’t advertise the time control for d/5 vs. being understood.