Let’s say in a 40/90,SD/30;inc30 game with the move counter on, the White player, who has completed 39 moves, flags before completing move 40 but then plays a move and presses the clock. What should happen with the clock under US Chess rules? I know the US Chess rule is for the freeze function to be off but different clocks do things differently here with the freeze function off. The clocks I have access to at the moment do the following in the above scenario with the freeze function off:
The DGT 3000 freezes for both players.
The VTEK 300 and longer Chronos add the second time control, but not the increment, to the player who ran out of time and will add the second time control and the increment for the other player once they complete move 40 (assuming they don’t flag before completing move 40).
The Leap PQ9912/Wholesale Chess Advanced freezes for the side that ran out of time and continues working normally for the other player. This clock always add the second time control once the players time in the first time control expires and only if the prescribed number of moves in the current time control have been met.
I’m just trying to wrap my brain around this. In scenario 2, the player who ran out of time misses out on the increment for one move. If the move counter was off, they wouldn’t miss out on the increment for a move. Why should a player get one less increment just if the move counter is on?
By default in mode 13 (1 h 30 m + 30 m + 30 s/move bonus), yes.
Before the game starts, hold down the key that is all the way on the right for three seconds. (The key has a snowflake on it.) The snowflake at the top center of the display will disappear, and “freeze” mode is off.
From a practical standpoint, if you see that your opponent’s clock shows 30:00 in the second time control (assuming SD/30) then it is clearer that your opponent ran out of time than if you see 30:30 (assuming +30), so not adding the increment makes claims clearer to resolve.
If your opponent ran out of time 1-30 seconds before flagging then their time should be greater than 30:00 (assuming the move counter did not match the actual number of moves played - and note that if the move counter is inaccurate then additional adjustments should be made for both players). If your opponent ran out of time more than 30 seconds before flagging then they already used the 30 seconds of increment while the clock was frozen (if the move counter was turned off then it would have granted the entire second time control while continuing to use up the time and the clock would correctly show less than the 30 minutes that is shown when the move counter is on).
I was referring to the VTEK 300 and the longer Chronos in that they don’t add the increment time for move 40 but add the second time control at move 40 in the scenario I described in the opening post in this thread.
Made 39 moves for each side, then let it run. When time expired in the first time control, the clock added 30 minutes, set the FLAG indicator, and continued to run. When the clock was pressed, 30 seconds were added.
The scenario I described in the first post in this thread was with the move counter on. Option 13 (and all of the presets) are set with the move counter off (although you can still see the number of moves made by pressing a button on the clock). You have to manually set the time control using one of the options 26-30 to set it with the move counter on (and it only lets you set the move counter for time controls with increment).
After a player’s 40th press of the clock, you want the clock to add 30 minutes and 30 seconds, whether or not his time has expired in the first time control.
What behavior do you want to see if a player’s time in first TC expires before he makes his 40th press of the clock?
Under US Chess rules, it seems to me that the most logical way for the clock to operate is for the clock to freeze for the player who ran out of time before making the prescribed number of moves in the current time control and continue to operate normally for the other player. This way you can always see on the clock that one player has ran out of time and it meets US Chess rule 16B2b. which is titled “Clock of player not out of time continues to run.”
Let’s say a player ran out of time on move 34 when the time control is 40/90,SD/30;inc30. If the clock doesn’t add the increment for each move but adds the second time control at move 40 and the increment with each subsequent move, the player has missed out on six moves worth of increment. If the clock of the player who ran out of time is going to continue operating by giving the second time control at move 40, I think it should also give the increment for each move. The problem with this is that it will be hard to tell that the player ran out of time with the clock adding the increment for each move.
If a player ran out of time on move 39 and the clock was frozen for a minute and a half then should the clock add 30:30 after move 40? Or 30:00? Or the 29:30 (or less) that it would show if the move counter had been turned off?
My question is why a player should potentially be able to get more time by flagging with the move counter on than by flagging with the move counter off. As the clock currently stands, that would occur whenever the time while the clock was sitting frozen at zero was more than the number of increments that would not be given versus what would have been given if the clock had the move counter off?
Example 1 time control 40/90 +30, SD/30 +30
Move 38 - runs out of time in a very complex position and neither player notices. The player spends an additional 45 seconds on the move. With a move counter the clock reads 0:00. Without a move counter the clock moved into the 30 minute SD time control and after the increment is applied the clock reads 29:45
Move 39 - 45 seconds spent. With a move counter the clock still reads 0:00. Without a move counter the clock reads 29:30 after the 30 second increment is applied.
Move 40 - 45 seconds spent. Without a move counter the clock reads 29:15 after the 30 second increment is applied. With a move counter the clock reads 30:00 (awarding the flagging player an extra 45 seconds) and you are asking for it to read 30:30.
Example 2 (more realistic that it not be noticed) 40/90 +5; SD/30 +5
Move 38 - runs out of time in a very complex position and neither player notices. The player spends an additional 10 seconds on the move. With a move counter the clock reads 0:00. Without a move counter the clock moved into the 30 minute SD time control and after the increment is applied the clock reads 29:55
Move 39 - 10 seconds spent. With a move counter the clock still reads 0:00. Without a move counter the clock reads 29:50 after the 5 second increment is applied.
Move 40 - 10 seconds spent. Without a move counter the clock reads 29:45 after the 5 second increment is applied. With a move counter the clock reads 30:00 (awarding the flagging player an extra 15 seconds) and you are asking for it to read 30:05.
Or, if you want up-to-date technology and a modern look and feel, rather than some stodgy person’s “correct clock operation”, you should ignore that advice and go ahead and use the move counter to its fullest capability.
It would be far preferable if the clock did not do that, BUT the clock should still indicate which player ran out of time first. Unfortunately, the DGT North American (apparently) always stops both clocks if it is in increment mode and the move counter is set to trigger the 2nd control.
Far better would be for the clock to flag only the player who ran out of time first, but to continue running on both sides after that. If the clock was set for the move count to trigger the control, this behavior should occur only if the move count was not satisfied (e.g. if a player ran out of time before move 40). Or, if the clock was set for the move count not to trigger the control, then that behavior should occur regardless of the move count.
That proposed behavior would be compatible with either of the two common rule sets. Under rules where it is the arbiter’s job to call time expirations, the arbiter would know which player expired first, and could rule a time forfeit accordingly, even if both players’ times expired before the arbiter arrived. Or, under rules where a double expiration means that the game continues, the clock would still be running and everybody could ignore which player expired first.
At the end of the final (SD) control, it is just a bit different. There, it’s not so bad if both clocks freeze, but even if they don’t, the clock should at least still indicate which side ran out of time first. Then, if both players run out, the arbiter can either forfeit the player who ran out first, or declare the game drawn, depending on the rule set.
I agree, but do you know of any clock which does that – sets the flag and adds the time? Also, the move counter is not definitive, and relying on it to set time can be a real problem.
That is what happens for all clocks that I know of, which is why I recommend not using the move counter to add the next time control.
Under USCF rules, the clock should not freeze in an SD time control because on player ran out of time (16B2b). I do believe all digital clocks do that.