So is your operating theory that your tournaments should be organized under the worst conditions you have experienced?
No, since I’ve said I’ve played under much worse conditions than how my tournaments are organized.
I would also note that your schedule leaves no wiggle room between rounds 1 and 2. It’s customary to allow a bit extra there to deal with the possible delays getting round one off on time.
I’m glad you set such a high bar for your tournaments. 
My latest event got 40 players, uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?201605150682.0
The schedule with the rounds at 10am and 3pm worked very well. It allowed players sufficient time off in-between rounds without forcing people to wait too long in-between the rounds or have the second round each day go as late in the evening.
10-3 is a decent schedule with 5 second delay. It’s not too bad even with 15 second delay as long as there are only two rounds per day, as you had here. I wouldn’t recommend it if there are three games on Saturday.
How many games did you have where the players started late because a previous game went long, and how late did those start?
I’ve found it is impossible to do the penultimate even at G/30;d5. I’ll bet you had some people finish the first round of each day before 11.
Alex Relyea
Edit for grammar.
While you can be justifiably proud to have just directed your biggest and (I assume) richest tournament in your career, 40 entries is still quite small. You may not have had a problem this year. At some point, you will. I hope next year you will cut it to G/110;d15 so you effectively eliminate the chance of the tournament being run off the rails by a long game.
Zero
I should also mention the 15 second delay worked very well as well. There weren’t any big time scrambles.
With 8 to 12 players per section and rounds at 10 am and 3 pm each day, it seems to have worked out. You did not have to combine sections because of a lack of entries. What implications did this tournament have on the prize fund? Did you reduce it or did you guarantee the prizes? If the players considered it a successful event, they may come back. But you are awfully close to having to combine sections.
What was the longest game that you had (in time played)?
There was only one player in the U1500 section so we had to combine that section with another and the player agreed to play in the U1700 section. The prize fund was based on 40 and we had exactly 40. Nobody was eligible for the 2nd U1500 prize and we decided to re-distribute this money amongst the other prizes.
Approximately four hours and twenty minutes
So did the one U1500 win the 1st U1500 money by default?
I hope not. That would be very cruel to him.
Alex Relyea
Yes, since he didn’t withdraw or forfeit. Our club has a policy that if you withdraw or forfeit, you are not eligible for prizes. He did finish with 2/4.
For the future, you might want to set a minimal number to actually have a prize (given the EF’s and prizes, probably 3). Even if you had 3 in the U1500, you would have combined it, but at least you are covered so you don’t give a prize to a “section” of one.
This is trickier than it sounds. There were others under 1500 in that section, but apparently they had registered for the under 1700 section to begin with. In such a cases, should the players who registered to play up be penalized for doing so when the section is ultimately combined? I remember such a situation in one of our tournaments where the TD did in fact rule that players were eligible for prizes based on the section they originally signed up for.
I am uncomfortable with the idea of a player not knowing whether there will be any class prize open to them based on whether other players in their class show up, particularly in events with several sections and freedom to play up.
I thought this, too, looking at the crosstable, but looking at their published ratings showed that all were 1500+.
Alex Relyea
BTW, Mr. Smith/Portland Chess Club were under no obligation to pay the 2nd U1500 prize the way they did. If no one is eligible for a prize (frequently top unrated when all players have ratings) then the organizer has the right to keep the prize.
It is laudable that he/they decided to effectively add prize(s).
Alex Relyea
Interesting. However, I’ve seen the situation happen here in Atlanta when sections were combined so it is worthy of discussion, though probably in a different thread. The issue Tom raised is not really topical for 15 second delay; it’s more a critique of this specific event. I don’t feel the need to second guess Micah’s event unsolicited.
I totally agree with your observations on the 2nd U1500 prize.
That would be a source for concern if you tried to do this again. Even with a fairly small tournament, you had a game go well beyond what one would like with round starts separated by five hours. With your time control, a 4 hour 30 minute game wouldn’t be that unlikely.