# Players can choose delay?
**URL:** https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167
**Category:** Running Chess Tournaments
**Created:** [February 2, 2015, 12:14am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167 "2015-02-02T00:14:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 13
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@Micah\_Smith](https://forum.uschess.org/u/Micah_Smith)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2015, 6:51am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/21 "2015-02-03T06:51:51Z")
> [@ericmark](#):
>
> > [@eastside](#):
> >
> > The Akron (OH) Chess Club holds its annual championship as a two-day, five-round affair with time controls of G/45 d5 (R1, R2), G/60 d5 (R3) and G/75 d5 (R4, R5). I played in this year’s edition early last month. It was actually quite enjoyable to play two longer games on Sunday, when the games were of greater consequence, but still be done relatively early.
>
> On MSA this is listed as G/60 d5 for all rounds and is Dual-rated.
In this type of event, if you are not going to list the different time controls for each round, you are suppose to report the slowest time control (G/75;d5) and thus the event should only have been regular rated.
---
### Author:  [@ericmark](https://forum.uschess.org/u/ericmark)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2015, 7:02am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/22 "2015-02-03T07:02:54Z")
> [@Micah Smith](#):
>
> > [@ericmark](#):
> >
> > > [@eastside](#):
> > >
> > > The Akron (OH) Chess Club holds its annual championship as a two-day, five-round affair with time controls of G/45 d5 (R1, R2), G/60 d5 (R3) and G/75 d5 (R4, R5). I played in this year’s edition early last month. It was actually quite enjoyable to play two longer games on Sunday, when the games were of greater consequence, but still be done relatively early.
> >
> > On MSA this is listed as G/60 d5 for all rounds and is Dual-rated.
>
> In this type of event, if you are not going to list the different time controls each round, you are suppose to report the slowest time control (G/75;d5) and thus the event should only have been regular rated.
Right—but what about the lower k for Masters in the first three rounds? That goes bye-bye then.
Who knows; if hungry Masters sniff out the deal here, they might sneak in and eat fish for three meals before the tough games start, thus qualify for the Whatever Invitational. (That was the reasoning behind lowering k for Masters in Dual events, right?)
Then listen to the deafening silence among the zero players who protest that their Quick rating was unjustly adjusted. Imagine the roar had that happened to their Regular ratings.
---
### Author:  [@tmagchesspgh](https://forum.uschess.org/u/tmagchesspgh)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2015, 7:34am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/23 "2015-02-03T07:34:26Z")
I stopped fully understanding how the rating system works a long time ago. With dual rating and all of the other tweaks to K values as well as sundry other adjustments and bonus points, I can no longer even estimate what someone’s rating will be. Recently, I thought one of my students would gain about 15 points after a scoring 2-2 in a local event. He actually gained 70+. Now I just wait for the event to be rated.
---
### Author:  [@Micah\_Smith](https://forum.uschess.org/u/Micah_Smith)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2015, 7:56pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/24 "2015-02-03T19:56:28Z")
> [@ericmark](#):
>
> > [@Micah Smith](#):
> >
> > > [@ericmark](#):
> > >
> > > > [@eastside](#):
> > > >
> > > > The Akron (OH) Chess Club holds its annual championship as a two-day, five-round affair with time controls of G/45 d5 (R1, R2), G/60 d5 (R3) and G/75 d5 (R4, R5). I played in this year’s edition early last month. It was actually quite enjoyable to play two longer games on Sunday, when the games were of greater consequence, but still be done relatively early.
> > >
> > > On MSA this is listed as G/60 d5 for all rounds and is Dual-rated.
> >
> > In this type of event, if you are not going to list the different time controls each round, you are suppose to report the slowest time control (G/75;d5) and thus the event should only have been regular rated.
>
> Right—but what about the lower k for Masters in the first three rounds? That goes bye-bye then.
>
> Who knows; if hungry Masters sniff out the deal here, they might sneak in and eat fish for three meals before the tough games start, thus qualify for the Whatever Invitational. (That was the reasoning behind lowering k for Masters in Dual events, right?)
I’ve brought this up before that this can happen in tournaments with multiple schedules/time controls but most people don’t seem to think it’s an issue.
> [@ericmark](#):
>
> Then listen to the deafening silence among the zero players who protest that their Quick rating was unjustly adjusted. Imagine the roar had that happened to their Regular ratings.
Maybe the master level players who gained points in the event cited are not aware of the lower k factor in dual rated events otherwise you would think they would complain and get it corrected to regular only so they gain more regular rating points.
---
### Author:  [@DENTONCHESS](https://forum.uschess.org/u/DENTONCHESS)
#### Post date: [February 5, 2015, 12:55pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/25 "2015-02-05T12:55:08Z")
> [@relyea](#):
>
> > [@Dayman](#):
> >
> > Saw an announcement recently that allowed players to choose whether or not to use delay. G/60 d/0 or G/55 d/5. Seemed like an odd way to go and I suspect this may not be a legal time control, but I did not find a rule on point. Thoughts?
>
> No, that’s legal. I assume that the organizer is directing players with a delay-capable clock to use the latter time control. I use 40/90, SD/30;+30 analog clocks play 40/90, SD/60. I think that’s sufficiently punitive that no one who had a choice would use analog. Of course I may be wrong.
>
> Alex Relyea
Something is only really punitive if it applies to one opponent and not the other. And, Alex, there are many, and quite a few
‘old-timers’ at that who find no delay, no increment, quite appealing.
Rob Jones
---
### Author:  [@DENTONCHESS](https://forum.uschess.org/u/DENTONCHESS)
#### Post date: [February 5, 2015, 1:02pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/26 "2015-02-05T13:02:31Z")
> [@relyea](#):
>
> > [@ericmark](#):
> >
> > Anyone up for an ADM to eliminate Dual rating?
>
> I’d be up for that, but I’d like to hear from the Ratings Committee first.
>
> Alex Relyea
Wow that is a hot potato!! Eliminate how–that is the question.
Eliminating time controls such as G/30;d0 from dual and making it for example, quick only would be a disaster for the scholastic
community in many parts of our federation. Now, if the topic is
to eliminate such time controls from quick, this is hard to debate on for what is quick and what is blitz has already changed a few times in USCF’s definition. Personally, it seems
to me that G/10 should be labeled as quick rather than blitz, but there, given the changes USCF has already had in this area,
is no firm ground here.
Rob Jones
---
### Author:  [@ericmark](https://forum.uschess.org/u/ericmark)
#### Post date: [February 5, 2015, 6:11pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/27 "2015-02-05T18:11:10Z")
> [@DENTONCHESS](#):
>
> > [@relyea](#):
> >
> > > [@ericmark](#):
> > >
> > > Anyone up for an ADM to eliminate Dual rating?
> >
> > I’d be up for that, but I’d like to hear from the Ratings Committee first.
> >
> > Alex Relyea
>
> Wow that is a hot potato!! Eliminate how–that is the question.
> Eliminating time controls such as G/30;d0 from dual and making it for example, quick only would be a disaster for the scholastic
> community in many parts of our federation. Now, if the topic is
> to eliminate such time controls from quick, this is hard to debate on for what is quick and what is blitz has already changed a few times in USCF’s definition. Personally, it seems
> to me that G/10 should be labeled as quick rather than blitz, but there, given the changes USCF has already had in this area,
> is no firm ground here.
>
> Rob Jones
What I mean by eliminate Dual rating is to stop rating games at G/30-G/65 as Quick. These games should be Regular-only, as they were for many years before Dual was implemented to save, fix, boost or publicize Quick ratings.
That has not worked and it’s been awhile now. Meantime, Dual causes confusion among players and makes it hard to run certain types of events without contortions, such as the one mentioned in this thread. Plus it just feels funny.
Players don’t take the Quick half of Dual-rated games seriously, per much evidence. See the Ohio event that Boyd Reed mentioned. That should have affected players’ Quick ratings for either zero or three games, depending on how it was submitted. (And again, there is no way to submit such an event without something giving way somewhere.) Instead all five games counted toward their Quick ratings. Did anyone notice or care?
Now imagine how players would have reacted had that affected their Regular ratings.
I have mentioned a club I know that used to hold G/40 events that were only Regular-rated—not Dual—for years after Dual was implemented. No one there seemed to care, either.
Players care—to put it mildly, in some cases—about their Regular rating, from G/30 and slower events.
Some players care about their Quick or Blitz rating, which is hard-wired into their brains as meaning G/29 or faster. I only know one such player, personally, but I don’t get out as much as I used to.
But tacking Quick rating on to G/30–G/65 games does not pass the sniff test. It just feels funny. Players don’t notice or care.
One game, one rating system. Lo those many years, even after Quick came along, a game was rated under one and only one rating system. That makes sense and that’s what players got used to. That’s how FIDE does things. As far as I know that’s how it’s done everywhere except USCF-rated G/30–G/65.
It might have looked good on paper or in a Ratings simulator run 15 years ago. It has not worked in practice. Time to simplify the position.
---
### Author:  [@relyea](https://forum.uschess.org/u/relyea)
#### Post date: [February 5, 2015, 7:16pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/28 "2015-02-05T19:16:31Z")
> [@ericmark](#):
>
> Some players care about their Quick or Blitz rating, which is hard-wired into their brains as meaning G/29 or faster. I only know one such player, personally, but I don’t get out as much as I used to.
Those of us who run tournaments with pairings and prizes based on quick or blitz ratings have seen people who care. Those who use regular ratings for pairings and prizes for quick or blitz tournaments encourage people not to care.
Alex Relyea
---
### Author:  [@Smythe\_Dakota](https://forum.uschess.org/u/Smythe_Dakota)
#### Post date: [February 8, 2015, 5:23pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/29 "2015-02-08T17:23:58Z")
> [@relyea](#):
>
> … I use 40/90, SD/30;+30 [with] analog clocks play[ing] 40/90, SD/60. I think that’s sufficiently punitive that no one who had a choice would use analog. …
To me, that doesn’t look punitive at all. Many slow players would probably jump at the chance to add an entire 30 minutes, and may deliberately bring an analog clock in the hopes of getting away with it in some rounds.
Adding time to compensate for inadequate equipment is a questionable idea to begin with. If you’re going to do it, at least add only half a minute, rather than a full minute, for each second of missing increment time. Thus 40/90 SD/30, inc/30 would become 40/90 SD/45 (not SD/60).
Bill Smythe
---
### Author:  [@relyea](https://forum.uschess.org/u/relyea)
#### Post date: [February 8, 2015, 7:16pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/30 "2015-02-08T19:16:14Z")
> [@Smythe Dakota](#):
>
> To me, that doesn’t look punitive at all. Many slow players would probably jump at the chance to add an entire 30 minutes, and may deliberately bring an analog clock in the hopes of getting away with it in some rounds.
>
> Adding time to compensate for inadequate equipment is a questionable idea to begin with. If you’re going to do it, at least add only half a minute, rather than a full minute, for each second of missing increment time. Thus 40/90 SD/30, inc/30 would become 40/90 SD/45 (not SD/60).
>
> Bill Smythe
Perhaps you’re missing that the flag falls earlier, up to twenty minutes earlier, in the first time control. It is only if the game ends between moves 40 and 60 that the analog player has more time. Also, there are good reasons for wanting any non-primary time control to be whole multiples of an hour.
Alex Relyea
---
### Author:  [@ILfish](https://forum.uschess.org/u/ILfish)
#### Post date: [February 8, 2015, 7:58pm UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/31 "2015-02-08T19:58:42Z")
The USCF eliminated the 5 minute deduction for the 5 second delay. The question maybe should be would it be acceptable to have a time control [for example G/55, d5] where if there was not a delay capable clock available that the time would be increased [G/60] by an additional 5 minutes?
Larry S. Cohen
---
### Author:  [@DENTONCHESS](https://forum.uschess.org/u/DENTONCHESS)
#### Post date: [February 10, 2015, 7:48am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/32 "2015-02-10T07:48:57Z")
> [@Smythe Dakota](#):
>
> > [@ericmark](#):
> >
> > … it sounds like this is a tournament for newbies …
>
> It sounds to me as though the organizer is the newbie.
>
> He needs to make it clear which time control will be used if the players disagree. Unless he is a Neanderthal, the delay option would no doubt prevail.
>
> Bill Smythe
Or it could simply be a desire to please everyone, regardless of their preferences, and may very well end up pleasing neither
camp, the no delay crowd and the those who prefer delay.
Rob Jones
---
### Author:  [@system](https://forum.uschess.org/u/system)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2024, 8:41am UTC](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167/33 "2024-04-22T08:41:06Z")
[Previous page](https://forum.uschess.org/t/players-can-choose-delay/20167.md?page=1)