Deducting time minutes for time delay

ThrillerFan:

Having the following games start later doesn’t mean better planning, if it makes the end of the last games unreasonably late.

Best planning would be to know about when games should begin and end, and minimize the extra time in-between, to avoid making the whole day longer. And that 35/90, G/60 at 9am & 2pm would be impossible anyway, you need some time to resolve any disputes that come up, not to mention at least 60 seconds after the earlier round ends to do pairings if its a large tournament.

Another thing I have noticed in these discussions about scheduling is the lack of set-aside meal time. Some games may finish before the limit, but at least some always go up until the last minute, leaving players with no time to get sustinence.

As it has been mentioned in someones tag line in these forums (I apologize for not being able to remember who’s), I know that my opinion is clearly in the minority, so the majority can be glad that I’m not in charge. If it was up to just me, the whole deal with whether to deduct minutes for delay (and how to evaluate games as regular/quick) would be solved simply and easily. That would be to realize that x minutes with 5 sec. delay is equivalent to (x+5 min) without delay. Game/x minutes without delay will end (as long as there is no interruption) no later than 2x minutes after the start. Games with x minutes and 5 second delay can end a bit longer. Of course, depending on the number of moves, even subtracting the 5 min. when using delay will not ensure that the game ends at the expected time, but it helps.

And those who say that when some of their games go less than 60 moves, so the 5 second delay doesn’t give them their 5 minutes back, are missing one very big point: because their games have gone less than 60 moves, the total time that they have used was divided by a smaller number of moves. That means that they have used an average time for each move which is MORE than if their games had gone 60 either with or without delay/subtraction. So they don’t really have a complaint about not getting enough time.

So that’s my solution - Game 120 means 120 without delay, and if delay is used, which is preferable but not required, then 115 min. + 5 second delay is the equivalent setting. No TD discression - make it simple and clear in all cases.

But the recent rule change has gone the other direction, I know, this ship has sailed. Oh, well…

I’m getting in late on this thread, but there are some important points that I’m surprised haven’t been made.

First, some background:
I’ve directed a total of 10 tournaments, all of which were scholastic, each of which had 6 rounds, and all of which were G/30. And they were G/30 regardless of whether a delay clock was being used.

My reasons for choosing G/30 were threefold. First, I wanted a time limit that would allow players to get regular as well as quick ratings. Second, I didn’t want the tournament to last too long (and this was not because of limitations on use of the facility, but because of concerns about how many hours the kids and their families could endure). Third, I knew from having coached kids in chess for more than 9 years that the vast majority of kids wouldn’t use more than 30 minutes to make their moves even if the time limit were G/45 or G/60.

And my experience has been similar to that of Jeff Wiewel. The tournaments were not particularly large (two had 28 participants, while the rest were somewhat smaller). But, to the best of my recollection, there hasn’t been a single game at any of these tournaments that ended because somebody ran out of time (though a few kids did indicate that they lost because they got under time pressure and consequently didn’t think out their moves adequately).

The closest I can recall anyone ever coming to losing on time was a player who was winning but who had less than a minute left on his clock. But he was able to make the half dozen or dozen moves needed to checkmate his opponent and do it before his flag fell. Even that game lasted less than an hour, because the kid’s opponent hadn’t used his full 30 minutes. Had they been playing with a delay clock (which they weren’t), the game might have lasted a few minutes more than an hour. But it would have been the only game in that tournament that exceeded an hour.

But what nobody seems to have mentioned is that there are other things that could significantly extend the length of a game. For example:

Scenario 1
Player B has been using about 1 1/2 times as much time as his opponent, player A. After 40 minutes, B has used 24 minutes, while A has used only 16. And, just 10 minutes later, B’s flag falls. But A doesn’t notice this. B does, but he’s under no obligation to call it, and doesn’t want to because doing so will mean that he loses.

The TD soon notices that B’s flag has fallen, but rule 13C1 doesn’t permit him to point it out. 10 minutes later, when the hour is officially up, A and B are still playing. B has used 36 minutes, while A has used 24 minutes, but A is deeply engrossed in the game and still hasn’t noticed that B’s flag has fallen. Some of the other players in the room (who have finished their games) notice that B’s flag has fallen, but under rule 13C1, they’re not permitted to point it out, either.

Another 10 minutes pass, and A still hasn’t noticed that B’s flag has fallen. B, at this point, has used 42 minutes, while A has used 28 minutes. The TD starts to breathe a little easier because he knows the game is going to end soon whether A notices the fallen flag or not.

Sure enough, 5 minutes later A’s flag also falls. B points this out and claims a draw, but even if he didn’t, the TD would have been able to call it a draw under rule 14G2. Still, this G/30 game has lasted a total of 1 hour and 15 minutes!

Is this scenario unusual? Yes. But, in my experience, it’s also unusual for a G/30 game to last more than an hour because a delay clock was used.

Scenario 2
A player who is a novice at chess is playing in his first tournament. 10 minutes into the game, his opponent summons the TD and explains that the novice made an illegal move. The novice player confirms this. The TD asks whether the novice player hit his button after making the illegal move, and both players confirm that he did. The TD explains that the novice player must take his move back and make a legal one, though he will be bound by the touch move rule. The TD also adjusts the clock (which the opponent had paused before calling the TD over) to give the opponent an additional 2 minutes. Total time to resolve the problem: 2 minutes.

15 minutes later, the TD is summoned again. Both players confirm that the novice player made another illegal move. The TD resolves the problem as before. Because it’s the second time it happened, the TD doesn’t have to explain as much, so it only takes about 1 minute.

20 minutes later, it happens again. The TD resolves it as before, and it again takes about 1 minute.

Altogether, the game clock has been paused for about 4 minutes while the TD resolved the problems. But the novice’s opponent has also had a total of 6 minutes added to his time. So if both players use all of their time, the game could potentially last 1 hour and 10 minutes.

I’ve actually had a situation like this occur, although the game ended with a checkmate long before the hour was over, so the time needed to resolve each problem and adjustments to the opponent’s clock didn’t ultimately make the game exceed an hour. But, obviously, it could have.

The bottom line is that tournament planners have to plan their events so that there is plenty of margin with regard to use of the facility where each event is being held. Adjusting time limits to compensate for use of a delay clock doesn’t eliminate the need to do this!

Bob

The following was a 5-SS G/30 with no time deduction for delay clocks and an ASAP schedule. The times are not exact, but are fairly close.

main.uschess.org/assets/msa_joom … 1-13008826

In the Primary section the rounds started at 10:10 (after announcements), 11:00, 11:45, 12:30, 1:10 with awards at 2:15 (could have been 1:50).
Elementary went 10:10, 11:10, 11:50, 12:20, 1:15 and 2:15 awards (could have been 2:00). That fourth round put Primary and Elementary back in synch.
The MS/HS/Adult section went 10:10, 11:15, 12:25, 1:35, 2:40 with awards at 3:45. If everybody was waiting with bated breath right outside the door when the pairings were done then it might have shaved about 10 minutes between each pair of rounds with a 3:05 awards ceremony.

Bob McAdams’ scenario 1 is vaguely similar to a situation at the Chicago Open one year when two players where each under 10 seconds and played the next 150+ moves on the delay time, adding more than 20 minutes to the playing time and delaying the final round even though five minutes actually was deducted from each side.
It is also very similar to a something that happened in a scholastic primary section (U300?) some years back where both players mis-read the analog clock and thought there was another hour for each to play. One had flagged but the other quick-playing player had plenty of time (in a poor position), so the game could have easily taken another 30-45 minutes. In that case a spectator passing by was NOT quiet and I ended up ruling a draw (accepted by coaches/parents of both players).

I really would like to get a definative answer. If a tournament is advertised as a G/30 tournament does this assume a 5 second delay or imcrement? Or is does this assume no increment or delay?

A tournament advertised in a Chess Life TLA as G/30 will use five-second delay unless something else (other than five-second delay) is clearly noted in the Chess Life TLA and all other advance publicity—and likely posted and announced at the playing site.

That’s not the issue we discussed in this thread. The question is whether or not to deduct five minutes from the main clock time for games played with delay-capable digital clocks. That is standard practice at many events and with many TDs and organizers; others never deduct the time. There seems to be regional bias here, from anecdotal reports.

Things could change at the Delegates Meeting this summer, but as of now a rule is scheduled to take effect next year (1/1/12) that prohibits deducting time from digital clocks to compensate for delay. That will take time to sink in with some players, who regard deducting time as the default rather than an option.

Stay tuned.

P.S. For nit-pickety chess lawyers: I suppose it is possible that a G/30 tournament could be advertised via email or on a Web site—but NOT in a Chess Life TLA—and it is announced at the site that no delay, or a 10-second delay, or a 3-second increment, etc. would be used. Anyone who did that would find much grumbling from unhappy customers, unlikely to return.

The definitive statement is given in rule 5F of the Official Rules of Chess, 5th edition.

Or: The definitive answer is the one provided by Eric Mark above. A tournament advertised as G/30 will use a 5-second delay, unless some other delay, or increment, or lack of either, is specifically announced in all pre-tournament publicity.

If you ever attend a USCF-rated event advertised as simply “G/30”, and the organizer or TD tells you at the site that there is no delay or increment, then that organizer or TD is out of compliance with the rules, and I’m sure the rules committee or TDCC would like to know about it.

Bill Smythe