US Chess rulebook-TD Tip after rule 39A

[Micah_Smith]

The TD TIP after rule “39A. Choice of equipment” on page 172 of the 7th edition of the US Chess rulebook says:

“TD TIP: Players of the black pieces sometimes misunderstand this rule when they want to use an analog clock on a game with sudden death time controls. If any part of a game is composed of a sudden death time control a properly set delay clock is preferred equipment and supersedes Black’s choice in cases where White has such a clock and Black does not (42D).”

This TD TIP should be revised to simply state that a digital clock (with or without delay (and/or increment) capability) is always preferred over an analog clock, including games without sudden death.

[nolan]

I’m not sure that a digital clock that doesn’t have increment/delay capability is an improvement over an analog clock.

And it seems to me that you switched arguments mid-stream, the issue isn’t whether or not the time control is sudden-death, it’s whether or not it has a non-zero increment/delay.

[Smythe_Dakota]

Rule 5F4 (seventh edition) says –

5F4. … In all cases, a digital clock is preferred over an analog clock.

This rule renders the entire TD Tip (after 39A) unnecessary, irrelevant, verbose, and confusing. It should simply be eliminated.

It is clear from 5F4 that digital is always preferred over analog, regardless of whether the time control is single or multiple, regardless of whether there is sudden death in any control, and regardless of whether increment, delay, or neither is in effect for the tournament.

Bill Smythe

[Micah_Smith]

@nolan

I’m not sure that a digital clock that doesn’t have increment/delay capability is an improvement over an analog clock.

To add on to what Bill stated, the TD TIP after rule 5F4 says:

“TD TIP: A digital clock operates silently. It can be set so that both players have exactly the same amount of time. Digital clocks time the game more precisely and are not subject to having the two sides of the clock run at different rates.”

[jwiewel]

@Smythe Dakota

Rule 5F4 (seventh edition) says –

5F4. … In all cases, a digital clock is preferred over an analog clock.

This rule renders the entire TD Tip (after 39A) unnecessary, irrelevant, verbose, and confusing. It should simply be eliminated.

It is clear from 5F4 that digital is always preferred over analog, regardless of whether the time control is single or multiple, regardless of whether there is sudden death in any control, and regardless of whether increment, delay, or neither is in effect for the tournament.

Bill Smythe

If memory serves, analog was originally designated a preferable to non-delay digital primarily because of one particular non-delay digital that was very inconvenient to use (probably hasn’t been produced in decades). That clock is no longer an issue and 5F4 could safely be changed.

[Micah_Smith]

@jwiewel

@Smythe Dakota

Rule 5F4 (seventh edition) says –

5F4. … In all cases, a digital clock is preferred over an analog clock.

This rule renders the entire TD Tip (after 39A) unnecessary, irrelevant, verbose, and confusing. It should simply be eliminated.

It is clear from 5F4 that digital is always preferred over analog, regardless of whether the time control is single or multiple, regardless of whether there is sudden death in any control, and regardless of whether increment, delay, or neither is in effect for the tournament.

Bill Smythe

If memory serves, analog was originally designated a preferable to non-delay digital primarily because of one particular non-delay digital that was very inconvenient to use (probably hasn’t been produced in decades). That clock is no longer an issue and 5F4 could safely be changed.

Why would 5F4 need to be changed from what it currently says due to this?

[Smythe_Dakota]

@jwiewel

… That clock is no longer an issue and 5F4 could safely be changed.

Or, more correctly, 5F4 already has been changed.

Bill Smythe

[jwiewel]

@Smythe Dakota

@jwiewel

… That clock is no longer an issue and 5F4 could safely be changed.

Or, more correctly, 5F4 already has been changed.

Bill Smythe

I meant to say “was no longer and issue”. Yes, it was already changed because the original need for it had disappeared.

[BobMessenger]

I’ve moved this topic from US Chess Issues to Running Chess Tournaments.

[wilecoyote]

@nolan

I’m not sure that a digital clock that doesn’t have increment/delay capability is an improvement over an analog clock.

It is an improvement for at least two reasons.

1. It is completely silent in its operation.
2. A digital clock ensures both players have exactly the same amount of time. Setting an analog clock is, at best, imprecise.
3. Analog clocks are susceptible to “gaming” such as setting one side to run slightly faster than the other side.

[sloan]

@wilecoyote

@nolan

I’m not sure that a digital clock that doesn’t have increment/delay capability is an improvement over an analog clock.

It is an improvement for at least two reasons.

1. It is completely silent in its operation.
2. A digital clock ensures both players have exactly the same amount of time. Setting an analog clock is, at best, imprecise.
3. Analog clocks are susceptible to “gaming” such as setting one side to run slightly faster than the other side.

You ignore history. Pre-increment/delay, analog clocks were specifically ruled to be superior to digital clocks
because of the annoying noise (and other factors) associated with one particular popular digital clock.

Yet another example of hard cases making bad law.

Digital clocks are NOT all “completely silent”

Digital clocks are just as susceptible to “gaming” as analog clocks (depending on how parameters are specified, and on the technical expertise of the player doing the “gaming”.

[Micah_Smith]

@sloan

Digital clocks are NOT all “completely silent”

All digital clocks that I know of can be set to not beep. A noisy button or lever is a different story but this applies to both digital and analog clocks.