Your first point is logically indefensible. The TD cannot require a player to supply a clock. (Well, I suppose you could make that a condition for entering the tournament, but that’s a rule variation that would certainly require advance written notice.) Your line of reasoning would penalize the player for revealing that he owned a clock.
The bottom line is that I consider resetting a clock for time-delay during the game to be a) disruptive of play, b) an abuse of the TD’s discretionary authority, and c) expressly prohibited by the rules. You can argue about “c,” but even granting those arguments (which I don’t), I would still refuse to do it on the basis of “a” and “b.”
This is such total BS. You have a player acting like a child (“if I can’t set my clock they way I want, I just won’t use it!”) and you think he should just get away with it?
If a player REFUSES to set a clock as directed, then he should be forfeited. Just as if he refused to set the appropriate time on the clock. All you middle-aged children who can’t play by the rules are probably too much trouble to have at a tournament for adults. If you don’t like the rules, you are invited to stay home and leave the tournament to the REAL adults. TDs have enough work to do without having to deal with players that simply refuse to follow the rules.
I was simply replying to your question of enforcement. Clearly, players who refuse to abide by the rules can and should be penalized. Knowing that the player has a delay capable clock is sufficient, in my opinion, to show that the player is in contempt for the rules, and at the very least would warrant a warning from me.
Now, I don’t mind if my players use delay capable clocks or not. I am very comfortable ruling on 14H claims. Therefore, I generally state at the beginning of the rounds that players may use whichever they want, with the player wanting the delay capable clock making the decision, if there’s a dispute. (I believe that it’s a player’s right to have a delay if he/she so chooses and supplies one).
In the case that started this thread, I agree the TD acted correctly, and I don’t disagree with your basic philosophy.
Nor I with yours. My point about enforcement was simply that the “require delay on” argument leads to a reductio ad absurdum. I might add that whenever a player asks me, I strongly recommend that he turn the delay on.
You may simply be thinking of my Dirty Pool sheet (which I have been known to post or hand out at tournaments) rather than anything official like the 5th edition rulebook.
[size=200]Dirty Pool[/size]
It is DIRTY POOL to use a delay-capable clock without setting the delay. Such a setting can confuse the opponent into believing there is a delay when there is none. This confusion can result in questionable time forfeit claims and unnecessary disputes.
If you furnish and use a delay-capable clock without the delay set, any or all of the following may happen to you:
The TD reserves the right, at any time during the game, to point out to your opponent that the delay is not set.
The TD may allow your opponent, at any time during the game, to substitute ANY other clock, digital or analog, furnished by him.
If you claim a draw by insuffucieint losing chances, the TD may summarily disallow your claim and subtract time from your clock. Your opponent, however, will receive the usual kind, gentle treatment should he make such a claim.
If you claim a win on time, the TD may dismiss your claim and give your opponent up to 5 minutes, plus delay time, to finish the game or reach the time control. No such consideration, however, will be given to you, if the shoe is on the other foot and your opponent claims a win on time.
If your opponent furnishes a delay-capable clock, you should watch its operation closely, during the first few moves, to make sure the delay is on. Request TD assistance if necessary.
I’ve never gone so far as enforcing 3. or 4. (I probably wouldn’t dare), but sometimes the threat is as effective as the execution. I have, however, gone so far as to warn opponents of known non-delay-setters, at the start of the game, that the delay is not set, and therefore that they have a right to furnish their own clock, or make a later 14H claim.
Actually I’ve never seen your dirty pool sheet, but that certainly makes it clear in terms of how you expect time delay capable clocks to be set. I like the final paragraph after #4. Players need to be responsible for knowing how the clock supplied by the opponent functions. Even in the days of BD (before digital) I always made sure I knew how the flag was going to drop. There were several clocks that it was hard to when the flag would drop. I always made it point to watch how the flag dropped on an unfamilar clock. (This didn’t work on time controls of 30 minutes, but fortunately there weren’t many of those BD.)
It seems to me if a digital clock with time delay set has priority over all other clocks then wouldn’t it make the rules more consistant to require time delay be set on a clock with that feature. If somebody doesn’t want to play with time delay set on a digital clock why would they spend the money on a Chronos when there are a number of $30 digital clocks with no time delay feature?
In terms of the subtracting 5 minutes on a time delay set clock, I think it depends on the schedule of the tournament. In a 1 round per week tournament subtracting time probably is not necessary. Though one club I play at we have to be out of the building by 11:00 pm, so subtracting the time is necessary. In tournaments where there is not much time between rounds, not subtracting messes up the schedule. I seem to recall one year at the USATE they did not subtract the 5 minutes, and some of the rounds ran late. I think the next day they told people to take the 5 minutes off.