Review of $15 clock: LEAP PQ9907S

[ericmark]

Today my LEAP PQ9907S digital clock arrived via ePacket from China, 10 days after I ordered it. It cost $14.98.

That’s not a typo. It cost $14.98. Had to try it at that price. Quick review from playing with it for a half-hour:

It supports both increment and delay. It is quite easy to set. (Did not need the minimalist user’s guide.) Requires just one AA battery. The display is clear and bright with good contrast. The rocker arms have the same feel as the DGT NA. It’s quite small compared to other clocks, which has its up- and downsides.

It can handle any time control I have played in rated chess—as long as it is a single time control game. That is the big issue with this clock. It does not support multiple controls. For that you need to step up to the PQ9912.

Another issue is the way the clock displays delay. It shows the delay time count down, but that takes up the entire display, a la the blue Saitek, so you cannot see the main clock time as the delay ticks down. Not ideal, as discussed in recent threads, but for short delays it’s tolerable.

It seems this clock is identical to the Wholesale Chess Basic Digital Game Timer, while the LEAP PQ9912 is identical to the Advanced Digital Game Timer. I cannot confirm that absolutely, but it sure looks like it from YouTube tutorials, photos of the clocks and comments from a respected chess clock dealer on another forum.

But the LEAP clock I just got is less than half the price of the WC Basic clock after shipping. (Save about $20.) The LEAP costs less than a BHB analog cost in 1980. Unreal.

Time will tell if the clock holds up or if there are hidden issues. I plan to use it in a Quick Chess event later this month, and if that goes well, try it at a G/60 d5 event in September.

Looks like it should be fine for single time control SD games with 5 seconds or less of delay. Since that is the only kind of rated chess, or close, that some players take part in, this is a good clock to keep in mind for those on tight budgets or enamored of thrift.

Those of us who play slow chess with multiple time controls need at least one other clock. But the LEAP PQ9907S could be a good backup for single-control events. For $15 it’s worth a try.

[ericmark]

P.S. If you decide to try this clock, make sure to order the 9907S as opposed to the 9907. The S makes a big difference: It supports delay and increment. I believe the 9907 (without the S at the end) does not support either. Not 100% sure of that but better safe than etc.

[BobMessenger]

@ericmark

Looks like it should be fine for single time control SD games with 5 seconds or less of delay.

It sounds like it can’t handle 10 second delay. Is that right? If so, that’s a problem at CCA tournaments. I suppose 5 second delay is better than nothing, but the opponent’s clock will be preferred if it can be set for 10 second delay.

[ericmark]

@BobMessenger

@ericmark

Looks like it should be fine for single time control SD games with 5 seconds or less of delay.

It sounds like it can’t handle 10 second delay. Is that right? If so, that’s a problem at CCA tournaments. I suppose 5 second delay is better than nothing, but the opponent’s clock will be preferred if it can be set for 10 second delay.

Sure, it ‘can’ handle 10-second delay. (Looks like 59 seconds is the limit.) But for reasons debated in recent threads, it is not ideal to have the delay time take over the display as it ticks down, such that you cannot see the main clock time, especially with longer delays.

A bigger issue for this clock at a CCA event is the single-control limitation. You could use it for the fast schedule, at G/60 d10 or whatever, but would need to find another clock after the schedules merge.

You will likely see the Wholesale Chess Advanced/LEAP PQ9912 clock start to show up at CCA tournaments soon. Don’t let them throw you or opponents of players who provide them. Unless they are radically harder to set than the 9907S/WC Basic, it’s quite intuitive.

For that matter, you could use a Basic/9907S in a multi-control game, if you re-set the clock (added time) after each time control. Not that I would want to do it.

That leads to an interesting question: Would a delay-capable digital clock that needed to be re-set at the end of each time control be preferred over an analog for a 40/100, SD/30 d10 game?

[BobMessenger]

@ericmark

A bigger issue for this clock at a CCA event is the single-control limitation. You could use it for the fast schedule, at G/60 d10 or whatever, but would need to find another clock after the schedules merge.

What I would tell the players is to pause the clock and get a director after they made the time control, to supervise adding 30 minutes (or whatever) to each side.

@ericmark

That leads to an interesting question: Would a delay-capable digital clock that needed to be re-set at the end of each time control be preferred over an analog for a 40/100, SD/30 d10 game?

I would say yes, especially since the analog clock would also need to be adjusted (adding 30 minutes to each side) after making the time control.

[timjust]

A question I have is can the time be adjusted while the game is in progress; i.e., TDs sometimes need to adjust the time for various reasons (typically to + 2 minutes).

[Smythe_Dakota]

@Tim Just

A question I have is can the time be adjusted while the game is in progress; i.e., TDs sometimes need to adjust the time for various reasons (typically to + 2 minutes).

What happens if the TD doesn’t know how to do a mid-game time adjustment on the particular clock being used in that game? TDs cannot very well be expected to know how to set all the various clock brands.

I would say that, if neither the TD nor either of the players is able (and willing) to adjust the time, the player entitled to the +2 minutes should be given the opportunity to substitute his own clock. If that, too, is not possible, then the player should be required to forego his +2 and continue the game without it.

Bill Smythe

[timjust]

@Smythe Dakota

@Tim Just

A question I have is can the time be adjusted while the game is in progress; i.e., TDs sometimes need to adjust the time for various reasons (typically to + 2 minutes).

What happens if the TD doesn’t know how to do a mid-game time adjustment on the particular clock being used in that game? TDs cannot very well be expected to know how to set all the various clock brands.

I would say that, if neither the TD nor either of the players is able (and willing) to adjust the time, the player entitled to the +2 minutes should be given the opportunity to substitute his own clock. If that, too, is not possible, then the player should be required to forego his +2 and continue the game without it.

Bill Smythe

Ah, is this clock even able to let adjustments be made?

[ericmark]

@Tim Just

@Smythe Dakota

@Tim Just

A question I have is can the time be adjusted while the game is in progress; i.e., TDs sometimes need to adjust the time for various reasons (typically to + 2 minutes).

What happens if the TD doesn’t know how to do a mid-game time adjustment on the particular clock being used in that game? TDs cannot very well be expected to know how to set all the various clock brands.

I would say that, if neither the TD nor either of the players is able (and willing) to adjust the time, the player entitled to the +2 minutes should be given the opportunity to substitute his own clock. If that, too, is not possible, then the player should be required to forego his +2 and continue the game without it.

Bill Smythe

Ah, is this clock even able to let adjustments be made?

Yes. It is quite easy to adjust the time during a game on the LEAP clock I got Monday. See YouTube tutorials for the PQ9907S or the Wholesale Chess Basic clock.

Also, if a player flags, the opponent’s clock continues to run, in all cases I have tried. That includes with increment enabled. And the clock adds the increment time before the first move for each side, so at G/90 +30 a player has 120 minutes for 60 moves.

I was skeptical about this clock too, but for the price I had to try it. Will report after I use it in a Quick Chess event later this month. Just from playing around with it, it looks like an option for folks who play all or mostly single-control events and/or those extremely strapped for cash.

[narceleb]

@ericmark

A bigger issue for this clock at a CCA event is the single-control limitation. You could use it for the fast schedule, at G/60 d10 or whatever, but would need to find another clock after the schedules merge.

You will likely see the Wholesale Chess Advanced/LEAP PQ9912 clock start to show up at CCA tournaments soon. Don’t let them throw you or opponents of players who provide them. Unless they are radically harder to set than the 9907S/WC Basic, it’s quite intuitive.

For that matter, you could use a Basic/9907S in a multi-control game, if you re-set the clock (added time) after each time control. Not that I would want to do it.

That leads to an interesting question: Would a delay-capable digital clock that needed to be re-set at the end of each time control be preferred over an analog for a 40/100, SD/30 d10 game?

Setting a single time control is the recommended procedure in CHESS HANDBOOK (p.67)http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html. When the time for the first time control expires, ensure that the required number of moves have been made, and add the time for the next period. But that is FIDE.

[wilecoyote]

@narceleb

@ericmark

A bigger issue for this clock at a CCA event is the single-control limitation. You could use it for the fast schedule, at G/60 d10 or whatever, but would need to find another clock after the schedules merge.

You will likely see the Wholesale Chess Advanced/LEAP PQ9912 clock start to show up at CCA tournaments soon. Don’t let them throw you or opponents of players who provide them. Unless they are radically harder to set than the 9907S/WC Basic, it’s quite intuitive.

For that matter, you could use a Basic/9907S in a multi-control game, if you re-set the clock (added time) after each time control. Not that I would want to do it.

That leads to an interesting question: Would a delay-capable digital clock that needed to be re-set at the end of each time control be preferred over an analog for a 40/100, SD/30 d10 game?

Setting a single time control is the recommended procedure in CHESS HANDBOOK (p.67)http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html. When the time for the first time control expires, ensure that the required number of moves have been made, and add the time for the next period. But that is FIDE.

I find this quite confusing. Is Mr. Scheible suggesting that the correct procedure as specified by FIDE is to set the clock for the first time control and then to manually adjust the clock at the end of the time control? If this is the intent, I can categorically state this is most definitely not the case.

[Smythe_Dakota]

@narceleb

… Setting a single time control is the recommended procedure in CHESS HANDBOOK (p.67)http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html. When the time for the first time control expires, ensure that the required number of moves have been made, and add the time for the next period. …

Are you sure?? The link you provided does not spell this out – it’s just a sales brochure. Can you quote the exact passage from Chess Handbook?

Bill Smythe

[relyea]

@narceleb

Setting a single time control is the recommended procedure in CHESS HANDBOOK (p.67)http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html. When the time for the first time control expires, ensure that the required number of moves have been made, and add the time for the next period. But that is FIDE.

FWIW, at the FIDE events seminar Carol Jarecki mentioned this book and stated that it was her considered opinion that there was one thing that was 180 degrees wrong. I don’t remember what.

Alex Relyea

[Smythe_Dakota]

Well, if that handbook says what narceleb says it says, that would probably be it.

Or maybe it’s the upside-down rook business.

Bill Smythe

[narceleb]

@relyea

FWIW, at the FIDE events seminar Carol Jarecki mentioned this book and stated that it was her considered opinion that there was one thing that was 180 degrees wrong. I don’t remember what.

Alex Relyea

Yes, I brought that tid-bit to her attention. It was the Korchnoi wrong Bishop scenario (Bagirov-Korchnoi, 1960), when he picked up the wrong Bishop to play BxR. Realizing he could not take the Rook with the Bishop he picked up, he resigned.

The book says that “intent” is required for the touch-move rule, and he obviously did not INTEND to move THAT Bishop, so he should be allowed to move the Bishop he intended to move.

Everyone disagreed with that interpretation of the rules.

I even cite that Korchnoi game when teaching, and tell my students to always pick up the piece they intend to capture, then pick up the piece they intend to move to that square.

[narceleb]

@Smythe Dakota

@narceleb

… Setting a single time control is the recommended procedure in CHESS HANDBOOK (p.67)http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html. When the time for the first time control expires, ensure that the required number of moves have been made, and add the time for the next period. …

Are you sure?? The link you provided does not spell this out – it’s just a sales brochure. Can you quote the exact passage from Chess Handbook?

Bill Smythe

I am home now, so I have the book:

5. Correct setting of the clock
Logical question is asked whether it is possible at all to set the electronic clock correctly. In order to reach an answer to that question let us consider the following hypothetical case:
A tournament is played with time control of 90 minutes for 40 moves + 30 minutes until the end of the game, without increment for each move played. The players bring their own clocks, so there are both mechanical and electronic ones. It’s obvious that we must set all clocks the same, i.e., that it’s completely the same for the player with which clock he’s playing. How do we achieve that? We will set the mechanical clocks to 4:30, so that the time control is at 6:00. After the flag-fall the arbiter checks whether the control move was completed and if it was adds 30 minutes to each player and continues the game. The same effect on the electronic clock we achieve when we set the players’ times to 1:30:00, and all other parameters to 0. The arbiter’s action is completely the same as when it is played with the mechanical clock.

This is the way we come to the procedure for correct setting of the electronic clock: It’s necessary to programme only the basic time until the first time control and the bonus for each moe played. All other parameters which the clock offers should be ignored and set manually after the time control.

The switch on such setting of the clock will at first cause minor problems because the players and arbiters are accustomed to the previous way of setting. The problems with the players will be quickly eliminated, by explaining in detail, in the Tournament Regulations and in the prominent places in the playing hall, the new way of programming the clock and the procedures after the flag-fall. As for the arbiters, there will be some discontent because they will have more work, but that is the arbiter’s duty anyway. After more than 10 years of application of electronic clocks the arbiters are without a doubt capable to add the time for the second (third…) period of the game in about ten seconds.

[Smythe_Dakota]

Is this “handbook” an official FIDE publication? The link you provided – http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html – seems to indicate that this book is the work of an individual private organizer, who seems to have some peculiar and outmoded ideas, including the idea that the use of analog clocks is still widespread.

Bill Smythe

[narceleb]

@Smythe Dakota

Is this “handbook” an official FIDE publication? The link you provided – http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html – seems to indicate that this book is the work of an individual private organizer, who seems to have some peculiar and outmoded ideas, including the idea that the use of analog clocks is still widespread.

Bill Smythe

Official? No. However, the authors are both IA’s and FIDE Lecturers:
Zoran Bojovic https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=935549
Branislav Suhartovic https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=923281

It is a useful book, even if one does not agree with all the opinions expressed by the authors, such as the touch-move issue mentioned previously.

[ericmark]

@narceleb

@Smythe Dakota

Is this “handbook” an official FIDE publication? The link you provided – http://www.chess4less.com/chess-handbook-book-for-arbiters.html – seems to indicate that this book is the work of an individual private organizer, who seems to have some peculiar and outmoded ideas, including the idea that the use of analog clocks is still widespread.

Bill Smythe

Official? No. However, the authors are both IA’s and FIDE Lecturers:
Zoran Bojovic https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=935549
Branislav Suhartovic https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=923281

It is a useful book, even if one does not agree with all the opinions expressed by the authors, such as the touch-move issue mentioned previously.

The question of when to re-set the clocks—either after reaching the number of moves in the first time control or alternatively after the main time for the first control expires—is interesting.

The point is that it is far better to use a clock that can be set for the whole game, whether that’s one, two or three controls. Stopping to re-set clocks is far from ideal. Thus I do not plan to use my new LEAP clock for a multi-control event, probably ever.

As TD of a 40/90, SD/30 event, I would rule that White’s DGT NA or any standard clock that supports multiple controls is preferred over Black’s clock that supports only one control and would thus need to be re-set.

This reminds me of the old days, when a one-day four-round tornado at 40/60 followed by 20/30 repeating forever was considered a marathon day of insanely fast chess. Players sitting there after 40 or 60 moves were completed, waiting for the TD to come over and re-set the clock with magical TD fingers.

Gotta love progress.

[narceleb]

@ericmark

The question of when to re-set the clocks—either after reaching the number of moves in the first time control or alternatively after the main time for the first control expires—is interesting.

The point is that it is far better to use a clock that can be set for the whole game, whether that’s one, two or three controls. Stopping to re-set clocks is far from ideal. Thus I do not plan to use my new LEAP clock for a multi-control event, probably ever.

Better still would be to stop having multi-control events.