I don’t disagree, but the premise was that the organizer was going to provide (and presumably set) the clocks.
Alex Relyea
I agree there are practical differences, depending on the clock design. And there also may be psychological differences for some players.
My point was, in most cases it would likely be unwise for the organizer to be explicit, in pre-event publicity, about “Bronstein mode” vs “USA delay mode”. Just announce “40/100 SD/60; d/30” and skip the details. Take care of the differences on site, case by case.
Now, if the organizer furnishes clocks for all boards, and if all the clocks are the same, then it might be OK for the advance publicity to state “Clocks will be furnished and set to Bronstein mode” or “Clocks will be furnished and set to USA delay mode”.
Whether the organizer or the players furnish the clocks, any organizer running a d/30 event has a lot to think about before the tournament begins.
If the organizer furnishes clocks for all boards, it would seem that the DGT NA, Saitek blue, and some GameTimes would be poor choices, for reasons noted by others upthread. Whatever model is selected, the organizer must then choose Bronstein or USA delay based on which one the clock can handle, or can handle best.
If the players furnish the clocks, the organizer might want to prepare an ordered preference list (and post it on site) that includes some or all of the following points, or something similar:
- A. Other things being more or less equal, if USA delay mode is chosen, a clock that displays delay as a countdown digit is to be preferred over one that displays delay in some other manner.
- B. Other things being more or less equal, if USA delay mode is chosen, a clock that displays both main time and delay time simultaneously is to be preferred over one that displays only one at a time.
- C. Unless both A. and B. above are satisfied, a clock set for Bronstein mode is to be preferred over one set for USA delay mode.
- D. If clocks furnished by both players satisfy the above, or if neither satisfies the above, the arbiter will decide which clock should be used, or may rule that the player with the black pieces has the choice.
Of course, all of the above should be thought through, well in advance.
Bill Smythe
As an arbiter, I love the 30-second increment. It makes my job of checking clocks much easier.
Every half hour, I go around the room and check the times against the number of moves on the scoresheet. I have found defective and improperly set clocks on those rounds.
A 30-second delay would mess up that calculation significantly.
Furthermore, “From 1 July 2021 games played without an increment of at least 30 seconds per move are not valid for titles or title norms, except in the case of disabled players.” (1.13)
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=198&view=article
Thanks, Jack, sounds like FIDE is still pretty much anti-delay, at least for title and norm events.
If you don’t disagree with that I wrote, then why do you hate a delay of longer than five seconds so much?
Perhaps I was unclear. If players don’t know how to set their clocks whatever happens is their own d### fault.
Alex Relyea
OK but I’m still curious why you hate delays of more than five seconds so much? Only one popular clock, the DGT NA, doesn’t display the delay countdown in some form and it’s the players fault if they use that clock. The Excalibur Gametime II can’t do more than 19 seconds of delay but the blue Saitek can’t do increment at all.
This is basically true, but remember that an improperly set clock affects both players. If my opponent has the Black pieces and a “standard” clock, he gets to use his clock. If it’s a clock that I’m not familiar with, it may not be easy for me to tell whether or not he has it set correctly. If not, “whatever happens” might be his fault (certainly not mine), but both of us are affected by it.
Since I am Chief Arbiter for the St. Louis Rapid & Blitz I can shed a little light on why they are using Bronstein delay and not US delay.
The main reason given was since they are using DGT 3000 clocks (so that they can be used with the live broadcast), the countdown display for the delay was considered to be too small for the players to view easily and therefore the Bronstein delay method was preferable.
This leads to the other reason in that since Bronstein delay was used in the previous GCT events they wanted to maintain consistency.
That’s an excellent reason to use Bronstein.
If the clocks were being furnished by the players, there would be another reason. With the longer delays (say 10 seconds or more), in USA delay mode the various clock brands have a variety of ways of displaying the delay, most of them bad.
Bill Smythe
I prefer Bronstein for the simple reason that it always displays the amount of time one has to make the next move.
The VTEC clock has no difficulty displaying BOTH the base time AND the delay being counted down.
I still like my idea of designing a clock so that it will display both Bronstein and USA delay simultaneously. With 40/100 SD/60; d30 it would look like this at the start of the game:
…[size=200]1:40:30[/size]
.
[size=150]30[/size]…[size=150]1:40:00[/size]
Bill Smythe