Why?
Tim
What good is bringing an analog clock if every opponent has a digital with delay since that’s always preferred equipment even when white supplies the digital? I suppose there is the hope an opponent will show up late and be forced to play with no delay, and time off his clock. 
Though the time a certain annoying player showed up 23 1/2 minutes late and still beat me by using only 30 seconds of elapsed time, I kind of wished I had an analog clock on the game. Though he probably still could have beaten me with 6 1/2 minutes too. 
When time delay first came out I felt giving up the 5 minutes up front wasn’t worth it since I’d need to make 60 moves to even it out. So I would use a digital clock with no delay and often end out making insufficient losing chance claims.
As I’ve played more game/30 over the years with delay and the 5 minutes deducted I’ve been much happier having those extra 5 seconds per move at the end. It makes promoting and going for checkmate so much easier! Some would argue that with the extra 5 minutes I wouldn’t need the delay at the end, however I manage to use of whatever time is given to me. I play in some quads where they play g/30 and don’t deduct time. I still have lost games on time in those events.
Not every player will bring a delay clock. If I bring a delay capable clock then my opponent has the right to expect me to set the delay. But if I bring an analog I just might be able to avoid the time reduction.
Judging by the number of times I have had to borrow one of the Marshall analogs I would say that I stand a good chance of being able to using my analog for many of my games.
I guess that’s why I always have my trusty Chronos in hand. 
It sounds as though you are in a bind, in that (1) the players want a control fast enough so that round 4 can start at 10:45, and (2) they want it regular-rated, and (3) they must respect the rule that a 5-second delay must be used if either player demands it and furnishes a delay clock, so that (4) you have decided to push the envelope as far as it can be pushed, by using G/25 d/5 in games with the delay.
How much better it would be if the rules allowed games announced as G/25 d/5 to be regular-rated, with the understanding that games played without the delay can still be G/25 and still be regular-rateable. Steve, I really think you should push for such a change.
Steve, you are simply trying to make the opposing argument look ridiculous, by linking it to an unrelated issue that really was ridiculous.
Well, if there are a significant number of other players who also want to avoid the 5-minute deduction, then there is a significant chance that our hypothetical loophole-seeker will get his way in at least some of his games.
Bill Smythe
Excellent suggestion, and probably long overdue.
I’d suggest a minor modification in the notation, though. The above makes it look as though delay is the exception rather than the rule. It should be the other way around:
G/25 d/5 (G/30 if d/0)
This clarifies that delay is the standard, and the lack thereof is the variation, just as it should be.
Bill Smythe
Two problems I’d have with the change are:
- that it might make people wonder if this is regular rated since the first thing they’d see is “G/25…”, and
- Deducting the time delay is the variation and USUALLY the TC description would just stop with “G/30” – you don’t need “G/30 d5”. Only show the clock setting with a time delay if it’s going to be different (not following the usual rule). In other words, having a different amount of time when a delay is used is a variation from the normal rule so you put that variation in paretheses to further describe the main time control.
I probably didn’t explain that very well…
I think the abbreviation “(QC)” is used in Chess Life TLAs for quick events, so the lack thereof would indicate regular-rated.
Or if the main time is different. Show the main time and the delay if either is different from the standard.
Bill Smythe
I agree with Grant’s first paragraph. Another frustrating thing our players do is both show up late and just set their clock for the full control. However, you don’t have to delay the round, just tell the players whose clocks are not set correctly to reset them with the proper amount of time.
[quote=“rfeditor”]
No and no. Forcing the players to use time delay (as in the post above) is, in my opinion, an abuse of power that should be met by the players voting with their feet. Quite aside from the practical problem that making such an announcement would result in a dozen players standing in line to demand that you set their clocks.
Hi John Please note that I was not discussing forcing the players to use delay. The question was, if they thought delay was on, would you then change the clock to add delay? As I have had problems arise when both - or one - players thought the delay was on and later discovered it was not, I think proactively. I agree with those who dislike players who coffeehouse their opponents by making them think that delay is on when it is not. This is why I wonder about pointing out non-delay digital clocks when observed. Still not sure if this is a good idea which is why I asked.
First, it depends in the point in the game. If both players came to me after ten minutes and said that they both mistakenly thought the delay had been turned on, that’s one thing. If they do it with ten minutes left in the game, my ruling would probably be different. Second, I would tell the players to change the clock. I have an absolute rule (personal, not rulebook) against setting digital clocks for players. If a player wants to use a time-delay clock, it’s up to him to know how to set it. If he can’t, he should get a BHB.
Other than this special case (both players, early in the game, realize the clock was incorrectly set and ask that it be corrected), I think this falls under “There is not rule [other than “insufficient losing chances”] which allows a player to request a time delay clock after the start of the game.”
A incorrectly set digital clock can be dealt with under rules 16O Defective Clock and 16P Erroneously set clock.
An interesting point is the part of rule 16O is where it states that the player must claim as soon as they are aware of it. Suppose I am using a clock that does not display seconds until late in the control. If I am not familiar with the clock and only realize that delay was not set until I had less than 20 minutes left, would you deny setting the clock correctly? What if I had asked the opponent who owned the clock at the start of the game and he assured me that delay was on?
If it was twenty minutes of so, and the owner of the clock had lied … misstated, I would probably allow the clock to be reset. What I’m thinking about is a case where a player tries this with [i]two[i] minutes left.
There was an earlier thread which discussed whether not having the time delay turned on counts as “defective” or “incorrectly set.” I have trouble swallowing that interpretation. A digital clock without time delay is a legal clock and a legal setting. My ruling above would be based on dissimulation by the opponent, not the status of the clock.