Why not try G/3 inc/2? Then you could restore the extra round.
G/3 inc/2 is fast becoming the international blitz standard, and deservedly so. It has a “look and feel” similar to G/5 d/0, or, if anything, it’s even a little more relaxed.
Having delay or increment in a blitz game ends a lot of problems, for both players and TDs.
Bill Smythe
This is a good suggestion but I think the players want the chance to gain “real” rating points with the minimum of effort. And if no-delay returns it will offer an alternative to the trick-pony time controls currently in place that make analog clocks obsolete. Also think of all the directors who will be called on to decide those “no-losing chances” positions.
The suggestion I made was aimed at the player pool addressed by Mr. Jones, in his post that immediately preceded mine. No-delay time controls haven’t “returned” - in fact, they never went anywhere. Delay time controls, especially in longer events, are now prevalent, but there are still events with no delay. And I haven’t yet met a director who prefers having to make ILC rulings to not making them.
I don’t see anything in Boyd’s post that either says or implies that the time controls he suggested would not result in ‘real’ ratings points.
There are both advantages and disadvantages to no-delay/no-increment time controls. Organizers and TDs should be aware of them when planning and running events. Sadly, I suspect many are not.
The posts about TLAs are another important but separate issue and perhaps both issues would be well-served by splitting this thread.
Yes, I should have done a better job of reading the post and this thread in general. I did learn that G/20 d10 is regularly ratable. It was my ignorance of this that made me assume that quick chess only was being discussed. Also, I was doubting if any directors would want to return to the “Mountain Landis” days of deciding chess games. I am going to make certain that if I find one of these no-delay tournaments to ask if a digital clock is preferable over an analog and why?
I’ve created a new topic for discussion of Rule 5B2.
It would be reasonable to declare a digital clock preferable even with no delay, because a digital has seconds-accurate timing. You know exactly (within 1 second) how much time you have left.
Bill Smythe
Excellent response! Thanks.
My heartfelt opinion after rereading rule 42 in its entirety is that the author never considered that someone would attempt to organize a tournament with a sudden death time control and no delay. Of course I do that all the time, but with an increment control. That seems not to have been anticipated, either.
Alex Relyea
We really do not have many scholastics in which the rounds go that quickly, although, I have completed 5 round G/30 no time
delay events in as few as 1.5 hours total. But, typically these events last about 40-50 minutes per round.
Rob Jones
Last Saturday, I have to admit some frustration at parents who a. came in late for the round, then left after two rounds because
the tournament was going too long. Now w G/30 No delay, we started at 2:30, and we had 2 rounds complete by 4 for their
daughters section. Not fast enough. by 5:20 the entire tournament was complete. This was not a scholastic, and adults were
playing in both sections as well. Had two more parents pull out their kids after R 3 because the tournament was not going fast
enough for them either.
Rob Jones
I guess they couldn’t get to a Dodgers game, sounds like the average fan at Dodger Stadium.
Parents who are so impatient that they cannot stand to wait around for a tournament to end are not very well trained or informed about the process of tournament play. Over time their children need to be weaned off such quick games to play in longer time control events. If we are in the business of education, we need to make parents aware that there are multiple goals for their kids to learn to play chess. One of them is to develop the stamina to work hard at a task for a considerable length of time. Second, their little darlings are someday going to have to take 4+ hour tests that are crucial on the way to success in an academic environment. Those tests are have the same need for precision, focus, and intensity that children gain from playing chess. Sadly, it is a cruel competitive world that does not favor the impatient person who can only give up one or two hours to thinking or performing difficult tasks. If that is the type of child the parent is satisfied with developing, then he/she should move on to more simple games and lowered expectations. Fortunately, most parents are not that spoiled and uncaring about their child’s development.
With respect, sir, you do seem to make several assumptions. Namely that the impatient parents are
“spoiled and uncaring”. These tend to be new parents. Those that stay there kids tend to improve,
and as they do, the parents understanding of what is required of them does as well. BUT-- if we are
to get these new parents to “stay around” the g/30 no time delay is the best medicine we have.
Rob Jones
As I said, the parents need to be taught/trained/informed about the process of competition, too. I have seen the impatient parents. They and their kids don’t stick around long. They are looking for shortcuts and tricks to winning, similar to the way they act when dealing with their kids in school. The process and the content are less important to them than the result. Whether the child is really learning is not important as the “A”, or preferably an “A+” through pressure on the school.
Some organizers have gone as far as including the expected finish time. An example is a 5-rd G/30;d5 ASAP event with a 10 AM start time and an anticipated finishing time of 3 PM. For the younger sections the trophies are generally finished before 3 PM, sometimes more than an hour before (the ASAP schedule does a heck of a lot more for moving the rounds along than removing the delay would).
The anticipated end time helps manage the expectations of parents.
Can you manage the full range of expectations of “helicopter moms?” 
Good luck with that.
Agreed. I had a little boy who was treated as the “golden child” by his parents. The kid, although
quite bright, was also quite lazy. Getting him to do assigned chess homework was nearly impossible.
Until, one day, a “miracle” occurred. It was all complete, neat, and correct. Also not in his handwriting.
Upon questioning, his sister admitted to doing his homework on parental instructions. Seems mom
did not wish for me to have the opinion that her little boy was lazy, so she had sister do the work.
Needless to say, I was astounded. Did not expect that. I told mom the time had come for them to
find another tutor.
Now in regard to G/30, no delay–there is no question whatsoever that these kids are learning and
progressing, seemingly with every tournament they play, or at least quite a few of them. Those that
notate, and take the game seriously do improve, and quite often, quickly in this time format.
And let me ask you this-- how often have you had players drop out of events because of negative
early round results, withdraw at the start because there is not the caliber of players to justify
risk to their ratings, refuse to enter at all because the pool is not strong enough. All are examples
of an emphasis on that which should be of secondary importance. Learning and growing should be the
priority. I have about as much distaste for parents in this category as those in the beginners pool,
and really, for this as a coaching philosophy as well.
Rob Jones
The problem with this is you never really know when the tournament is going to be through. Lets say
you have a 3 round G/30 tournament. The 4 round novice section could be finished in an hour. Now
some parents will take whatever you estimate as “gospel”. If you start at 1, they will not be seen
until 4. Many look at their kids tournaments as the idea “child-sitting” service. What cheap daycare.
Like there is some sort of deal, that no matter what, by them paying the EF, that you agree to take
care of their kiddo until x hour.
Rob Jones
I did say “helps”. Some expectations cannot be managed. In the past I have quite calmly and matter-of-factly told such parents (not always moms) that their kids engaged in actions explicitly described by the rulebook as unsportsmanlike, and succeeded in doing so without causing a scene.
I’ve found that having graying hair, a TD’s shirt, lanyards from scholastic nationals, a steady voice and a stone/poker face end up going a long way towards getting parents, coaches and players to feel that you do know what you are talking about. There are parents or coaches that would tell the Pope that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about concerning Catholic doctrine if that’s what it took to try to get an advantage for their kids, but I really don’t come accross them that much.