This is an excellent idea, but like most excellent ideas, it must be executed well in order to work. The devil is in the details.
Some ideas for such a committee to consider:
Please do not suggest standards that are contrary to the FIDE standards. Such contrariness creates serious problems for clock manufacturers, TDs, and players.
In the event of a time forfeit in a non-sudden-death control, the clock should not halt. It should keep running, and there should be an indicator (such as the display of a flag) that would inform players, TDs, and spectators whose time expired first. This indicator should appear only on the side of the player who ran out of time first, and should remain on for at least five minutes.
A five-digit display (h:mm:ss) is preferable. Leading zeroes in the h:mm portion should be suppressed (replaced with blanks), as should the colon in h:mm after h becomes zero. Leading zeroes in :ss should not be suppressed, nor should the colon in :ss.
All clocks should implement increment, Bronstein delay, and discrete delay. (Bronstein and discrete delay are mathematically equivalent, but many players have strong preferences.) Discrete delay should be implemented with a countdown digit(s), rather than with just the word “delay” or with flashing colons or flashing hyphens. During the discrete delay, the full main time (h:mm:ss) should still be displayed, as should the countdown digit(s).
In both increment mode and Bronstein delay mode, add-before should be implemented rather than add-after.
The clock should never beep audibly, either during the game or during the initial setup process. (As an exception, a very soft electronic “click” on each move should be OK, especially on clocks with touch-sensitive buttons.)
On the contrary, I’d like to see the display screens on all clocks expanded, so that there is room for the full h:mm:ss main-time display AND a discrete delay (at least two digits) AND a move counter (2 digits, maybe even 3).
Should it be able to have varying delay based on which time control the game is in (i.e. 40/120;d0, SD/30;d10)? Note that the clock-press counter would need to be active and be used for going to the next time control as otherwise the initial moves after 40 might not have delay.
Do the seconds always have to be the same size as the hours and minutes (the Gametimer has three large and two small digits and can be set to show seconds as small digits until the number of minutes gets under 10 and the seconds can be transferred to the large digits)? By the way, I do like this requirement since I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve seen a clock set for G/90 where the 90 was hours, not minutes.
Does it have to show H:MM (up to 9:59)? or is MMM okay (up to 999 or almost 16 2/3 hours)?
I’d prefer to see the flag indicator stay on until both players have used up all of the time in the applicable time control. Having it for only five minutes risks somebody going to the restroom and coming back with the flag indicator having already come and gone.
For casual blitz an audible beep may be quite beneficial, so I disagree and think it should be optional.
I have no problem with those who do not wish to use move counters. I think they’re useful - and, since I am capable of properly operating any clock I own with a move counter 100% of the time, I should be able to use them if I wish.
I was pretty indifferent to the move counters until the World Open where most of the questions was a clock “clarification” which was if move counter was activated, does the player get the next time control now or after they have exhausted the primary time control. It got to the point where I just started setting everybody’s time to one time control and told them to seek a TD with notation sheet to get the next time control.
Yea, I trust you Boyd to figure out the settings and know how to use the clock… It’s the others I go =.=… I guess the next thing I need to do is figure out each clocks nuisances and put them in an excel spreadsheet.
Bottom line: players are responsible for setting their clocks. If they don’t know, I default to no move counters and hence “pass on the clock-presser/move counter” .
Please remember that move counters are not official. Only the score sheet [Monroi or electronic equivalent] if official for the number of moves made. Remember the original Gametimer? If the players hit the buttons fast enough moves did not register on the clock counter. I agree that move counters are nice, but they are a convenience for the player.
Or an inconvenience if you’re playing Mr. Presses Clock Very Slowly. By the way, that’s me. The move counter is wrong in about 1/3 of my games with one. If black, I will insist on the move counter turned off, and have a properly set clock in my possession. Consequently, I don’t see a move counter too often.
It’s probably true (shudder) that a few organizers do this sort of thing, against the strong advice of both the rulebook and just about anybody with common sense. So, yes, the clock would need to allow (shudder) the delay to be set differently for the initial and final controls.
The can of worms opened by this possibility would, I’m sure, keep a full team of professional fishermen in business for an entire fishing season. For example, should the move counter be:
not displayed, OR
displayed, OR
displayed and trigger the next control?
Or, worse yet:
not displayed, but trigger the next control anyway?
There are various (huge) disadvantages to each of the above.
By the way, in my opinion your notation is backwards. A semicolon is a stronger separator than a comma. Instead of “40/120;d0, SD/30;d10” you should write “40/120,d0; SD/30,d10”.
I’d like to see all five digits (h:mm:ss) the same size. Less confusing.
In fact, I’d like to see a computer-style screen, where the digits are not confined to specific screen locations. When the time drops below 1:00:00 to 59:59, the entire display should shift left by one-half of a digit-width so it would still be centered. Ditto when it drops below 10:00 to 9:59, and again when it drops below 1:00 to :59.
See below.
I don’t like MMM (too confusing, as in your G/90 example) but I have no problem with MM with an upper limit of 99 rather than 59. For example, for G/90 it should be possible to set the display initially for 90:00 rather than 1:30:00.
Good point, except that an audible beep is not “optional” for all the other players in the room. I have played in a few regular-rated tournaments where some clown somewhere in the playing area has had his Saitek set to beep loudly on every move.
This functionality should be encouraged, if only because that’s how world championship matches and qualifying events are played. (Increment starting on move 61 rather than move 1)
I agree that delay/increment from move one is the best policy for normal USCF-rated play. But you could make a case that delay should only be used in the ultimate time control of mixed-control games. The practical upside to keeping things simple and consistent and avoiding confusion over clock settings and possible re-settings takes precedence for the vast majority of USCF-rated games—but you can make a case for it.
I know a guy who argued thusly, to the point I agreed to play a rated 40/90, SD/60, d5 (41) game against him once.
He got disgusted when he could not figure out how to program that control into his Saitek Pro. Since that’s the one clock I cannot set without major contortions, we let it go. I don’t think a Saitek can be set that way anyhow.
But the Ultimate clock, customizable for K-3 G/30 events for beginners up to a WC match, should include the option for different delay/increment values for each segment of the time control.
Since many players do have strong preferences, and since the two forms of delay are indeed equivalent, I wonder if it would be worth suggesting that clocks let the form of display be set independently for the two sides, so each player can see his time using the form he prefers?
I’m reasonably sure that the Saitek Pro can have different delay times for each time segment. I don’t have it in front of me right now, so I can’t verify it. I’ll check it out later at home.
What it can’t do, though, is have delay for one segment and then increment for another. But, that’s probably a good thing. Talk about potentially confusing…
How about a 15-second delay, 15-second increment in the same segment? It would be somewhat faster than a 30-second increment while still giving at least 30 seconds for each move.
Things that I think were overlooked:
Displaying tenths of a second, and having delay or increment include fractional second options.
Being able to connect the clock to a DGT board so that the time could be displayed along with the position.
Having a USB port for pulling a specific time setting from a flash drive.
Being able to connect with a TD’s computer via wi-fi. Although this type of connection may not be desirable if it is susceptible to hacking.
This is an awesome idea!! I have been suggesting this for a few years now. This would be a TD’s dream. You don’t have to know how to set 50 different kinds of clocks. When someone asks you to set their clock for them, you just whip out the USB drive, plug it in and the clock sets itself!
As a player, I say the same thing. I have no great preference (perhaps no preference at all) between Bronstein and discrete delay, but I absolutely refuse to put up with the confusion of having the two sides different.
How my side of the clock is set is just as much my opponent’s business as it is mine, and how his side is set is just as much my business as it is his.
