I shudder to think of some player committing that dastardly deed of capturing a piece and using it to punch the clock, and cracking the screen of his opponent’s tablet running a clock app.
Seriously, a DGT North American clock (capable of delay and increment) can be had for $40.
…
The physical aspects of a smartphone computer or a pad computer are wrong for the way players would press it etc.
The purpose of writing a chess clock app would be merely to demonstrate how much better chess clocks should be by now.
A chess clock app could do the following things: But as a demo the screen could show statistics for the player who is currently off-turn; stats such as…
A. Statistics: Show statistics for the player who is currently off-turn.
A1. Mean time remaining per turn, until start of the next segment of the overall time control.
A2. Mean time consumed per turn so far.
A3. Median time consumed per turn so far.
A4. Retain for post-mortem a list of all clock times and durations for each turn.
B. Time Control Wizard: Use a series of screens (a “wizard”) to collect detailed info about the each segment of the overall time control. This would enable precision yet make it easy and self-explanatory, no need for a manual.
C. The concepts of DELAY and INCREMENT could be partially merged.
C1. Today’s clocks offer a delay where the player loses all the remaining time, 100%, for the current 10 second delay if he moves after 3 seconds; meaning he keeps 0% of the remaining time. But with a better app that % could be tune-able to percentages like 33% or 50% of unused delay time being retained - to give some legitimate incentive without bloating the length of the time control.
D. Clock could have a button to offer a draw, to cause a clear visual offer indicator.
E. Keep the counter, just properly label the counter as “Counter of Button Presses by Black” (well, something shorter that also avoids the misnomer of “Move” counter).
F. Have the word “Pause” be tappable on screen, so that the clock is self-explanatory and everyone knows how to pause the clock if necessary. Too many of the no-longer-genuinely-modern electronic chess clocks are not self-explanatory in this regard and in other ways.
I can buy two Android pad computers for the cost of one Chronos chess clock. There is no excuse for such poor functionality in electronic chess clocks in this day and age.
Hmm, I wonder whether instead of information-poor button presses to indicate completion-of-turn, there would be advantages to instead requiring the player to enter his move on a touchable position diagram - as the way to press his clock. Then a handy PGN would be available to download.
The obvious problem is that occasionally a player would enter a wrong move, and fixing that mistake would be a mess.
…
Completely true. Yet if one already has a device capable of being used as a chess clock. Then I could see where that person would be willing to save that $40 dollars.
If there is any other alternative (i.e., are real chess clock available), I would say NO.
When there is time-trouble, I like to be able to observe the clocks from several feet away. I want to be sure the increment or delay functions are working. I want to be able to keep track of the time in case of malfunction. (I was watching when one just died while one player had five minutes and the other less than two.) And for FIDE-rated events, I need to be there to call a flag.
I do not want to have to hover over the board to see the clock, not only to be unobtrusive, but also because I probably have other boards to watch, too.
This is extremely well stated.
I don’t think there’s anything in the rules that requires a clock be visible from a distance away for the convenience of the TD or that the clock face (digital or analog) be vertical, though nearly all clocks are. However, there used to be a strong player active in Nebraska events who had an analog clock with two clocks that laid flat on the table, with the clocks facing the ceiling. I always thought it was a rather cool looking clock, but I never had to make a time ruling using it.
Quite true. The point goes to FIDE on this one. The FIDE Standards of Equipment and tournament venue for FIDE Tournaments require for digital clocks that the display be readable from a distance of three meters and that it is possible to see which player’s clock is running from a distance of ten meters.
(Before unnecessary complaining breaks out, I will point out that the FIDE handbook uses the term “FIDE Tournaments” specifically to refer to continental and world events. The term “FIDE Tournaments” does not mean “all FIDE rated tournaments.”)
A1 strikes me as stepping across the line to aid the players in how to play their game. I would argue the same for A2 and A3.
If B is about setting up the clock to begin with, that would be great. Current clocks are hardly intuitive when it comes to setting time controls… some even less so than others.
C just seems to add a lot of unnecessary complication. Honestly, how many variables do we really need?
D could be helpful to remove ambiguity if its use were required… unlikely until/unless all clocks have the same functionality.
E Tomato/Tom-ah-to
F That would be a great improvement on all clocks.