US Chess Rule 42A and 42B

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Rule 42 is titled “Chess Clocks”. Rule 42A is titled “Basic requirements” and talks about analog clocks and Rule 42B is titled “Digital clocks” and talks about digital clocks. A better title for 42A would be “Analog clocks”.

Also, rule 42B states:

“Digital clocks with time delay (or Bronstein add back) capability are fully acceptable as tournament equipment. If such clocks are used in competition the providers should, upon request, explain all relevant operational facts to the tournament director and each opponent. Relevant operational facts to be explained include, but are not limited to, the signal at the end of the time control period, any display change from minutes to seconds and any resetting that might occur at the start of a new time control period.”

What about digital clocks with just increment capability or digital clocks without delay or increment capability? Also, the tone of rule makes it seem like digital clocks aren’t widely used. The rule would be improved by simply eliminating the first sentence and a half (it’s already been made clear in the rulebook that digital clocks are preferred over analog clocks so there is no need to state here that “Digital clocks with time delay (or Bronstein add back) capability are fully acceptable as tournament equipment”).

Improved version of rule 42B (I’m sure if could be improved some more but here is a start:

“The providers should, upon request, explain all relevant operational facts to the tournament director and each opponent. Relevant operational facts to be explained include, but are not limited to, the signal at the end of the time control period, any display change from minutes to seconds and any resetting that might occur at the start of a new time control period.”

2

I like this as a start, but why not also eliminate rule 42A completely?

Also, I think the rules in general are overlooking that, increasingly, some organizers are furnishing clocks for all boards. In a few cases, some of the rules may apply only, or mostly, to player-supplied clocks. In a few other cases, maybe the rule should be just a bit different for the two cases.

Bill Smythe

3

Did you mean get rid of rule 42B entirely?

4

No, I meant get rid of 42A. It’s all about analog clocks, and who uses those anymore?

Bill Smythe

5

The Wisconsin Chess Association has a box of analog clocks that we sign out to players who don’t have clocks. It’s a rare round where we don’t sign out a few of them. So that’s one case where they’re still used. There are probably also some older players who prefer analog clocks, and if their opponent doesn’t have a clock, they get to use their trusty old analog clock. So I think it’s useful to keep that rule around for a while yet.

Of course, now when almost all games are online, you could ask who uses any kind of clock anymore?

6

I know a few older players who only bring an analog clock to tournaments and couldn’t bring a digital clock with them if there life depended on it!

7

No, I really don’t like the concept that TD’s would be held responsible for knowing how to operate every clock out there. I’m fine with requiring the player who supplies the clock to be familiar enough with its operation to carry out any direction the TD gives, or face penalty. (Now if the TD supplies the clock then yes, the TD is responsible for it.) That’s just my opinion.

8

I don’t think that’s what Micah meant. By “provider” I think he meant the person furnishing the clock. In a tournament where players furnish their own clocks, the player furnishing the clock should be able to explain its operation to either the opponent or the TD, upon request.

Bill Smythe

9

“Provider” is the term the rulebook uses in rule 42B.

10

As written, 42B seems schizophrenic. It comes directly from the 5th edition. It starts out talking about the single-display implementation of delay (“Bronstein”, if you will), then gradually morphs into a discussion of digital clocks in general.

If clocks are furnished by the players, then the “provider” is presumably whichever player provided the clock.

But when clocks are furnished by the organizer, the “provider” is presumably the organizer, and what player wants to listen to a lengthy opening announcement explaining clock details? In complicated cases, such as two time controls, I could see the organizer wanting to put up a written notice (posted during registration and throughout the tournament) telling the players whether the clock will add 30 minutes after move 40, or only after the first control is used up. But in simple cases, all the players need to hear is “Time control is game 90 increment 30, all clocks have been set, thank you for coming, please begin your games.”

Bill Smythe

11

I like when you give an analog clock to a young player, and they don’t know how to set it.

12

Would have less objection if it read ‘tournament director and each opponent on request.’ Would have less still if it was ‘explain all relevant operational facts upon request.’ It still reads to me like it creates an obligation for the tournament director to therefore know the relevant operational facts of the clock. But sure, I could be reading too much into it. :wink:

13

I like your first idea. The second seems a little broad, it could include not only the director and each opponent, but also any spectator who wanders by.

Bill Smythe

14

True, but these are the same people we count on to set all the digital clocks for us in tournaments with organizer-supplied clocks.

Bill Smythe

15

Despite the wording in the rule, as a practical matter, when was the last time anyone asked someone to explain the features on their opponent’s game clock?

16

I can’t say that anyone has asked me to explain the features on my clock, but I usually do anyway, to forestall later confusion. In particular:

(1) In multiple time controls, my Chronos clock does not automatically add time after move 40 (or whatever the limit is for the first TC), because I deliberately set it without a move counter – so it has no way of knowing when move 40 is reached. Some opponents have been taken aback when this happens, so I tend to explain before the game that the time will be added when the initial time runs out, and not before.

(2) The DGT North American clock indicates that you have reached the second time control by showing a small flag symbol in the display (a very poor choice of symbol, in my opinion), causing some people to think that they have “flagged” – even though they know that they haven’t. So if I’m using that clock, I will make sure my opponent understands that particular feature.

17

Yes, this wording does seem like a relic, doesn’t it? It comes largely from the 4th edition, at a time when digital clocks and the concept of delay were just getting started, and increment wasn’t even mentioned.

Reading the 4th edition today can be a real eye-opener. That edition came out in late 1993, and became effective January 1, 1994.

From the 4th edition:

[b]42D. Digital clocks. Digital clocks are NOT fully acceptable as tournament equipment in all circumstances, even though most meet the essential demands of accuracy, silence, and a signaling device. (They beep or cease operating instead of having a flag.) Some players have difficulty with the digital readout. Others object to a sound signal (a beep instead of a mechanical click) when one clock stops and the other starts, or have difficulty seeing from a distance which player is on move. Some digital clocks show minutes at times and seconds at other times, which confuses players, and some reset in a confusing way after the first time control, or lose track of hours while counting only minutes during later controls.

Until such objections are overcome, owners and advocates of these devices should not expect to force their use on opponents. If digital clocks are used in competition, the providers should explain all relevant operational facts, such as the signal at the end of the control, a display change from minutes to seconds, and how any clock that resets after each control does so.

42E. Standard clocks. A conventional analog clock is more “standard” than a digital clock and may be used even if black supplies and prefers a digital model.[/b]

(Emphasis on NOT in the first sentence is mine.)

All of that changed in August 1996, when the August printed rating supplement came out. All of a sudden (effective January 1997), digital clocks were preferred over analog, and a 5-second delay became standard, even if delay was not mentioned in pre-event publicity. Many organizers and players did not even notice these changes, until they were brought to everybody’s attention by a handful of astute readers who finally bothered to put the rulebook on one knee and the rating supplement on the other and compare, rule by rule, to comprehend the true magnitude of the changes.

These changes prompted the need for a 5th edition, which finally appeared in 2003.

Bill Smythe

18

In the tournaments I have played where there are two controls and the players furnish clocks, virtually all of the Chronos users appear to turn their move counters on, and the move count triggers the 2nd control. It just seems more natural that way, but it does require at least one of the two players to keep close watch on the move counter.

I think most DGT NA users, if they furnish their own clocks, would instinctively (and perhaps unwittingly) set their clocks so that the move count triggers the 2nd control. That’s because, to get the DGT NA not to do this, you have to tell it that there are 00 moves, rather than 40, in the first control, which I think most players would find counter-intuitive.

Bill Smythe

19

I strongly dislike move counters, for two reasons:

(1) Because different clocks display the move count differently, it is inherently ambiguous. Some clocks show the number of moves that have already been played, while some show the current move number (i.e., the move count display would show a “1” while the player is pondering his first move, but has not made the move yet). So unless I’m familiar with that specific clock model and which method it uses, I can never be sure what the count actually is.

(2) It is too easy for the count to become wrong (somebody forgets to press his clock, an illegal move requires an extra pair of clock presses, etc.). I do not want to have to be anal about keeping the move count accurate, nor do I want to have to stop the clock during the game and go into the menu to correct the move count. I would rather concentrate on playing good chess. Despite certain people’s assurances that move counters are flawless if operated correctly, that only works if robots are playing. People make mistakes, and even if I operate the clock correctly (not guaranteed), I can’t control my opponent and make him do so.

In any event, a move counter on the clock is redundant. The scoresheet is your move counter, and it is the only move counter you can use to make a claim. It’s simply not a proper function for the clock.

That’s not my point. As you say, the default for the DGT NA is for the move counter to be on, and even in that mode, it shows a flag symbol to indicate that you have passed to the second control. This happens precisely when you have made the required number of moves. The clock is not trying to tell you that you have flagged – it’s merely indicating that you’re in the second control (somewhat like Chronos does with one or more horizontal bars in the corner). So this is not a problem that can be fixed by having the move counter on. It will still do it. The problem is that it’s a poorly chosen symbol.

20

I won’t argue with that, but its purpose is also to let the TD know which player ran out of time first. The flag appears only on the side that expired first, and it disappears after 5 minutes.

Bill Smythe