Questions on conduct during a game

[NickFaulks]

So I don't see why this continues to generate discussion.

Perhaps because not everybody agrees with you?

[Stewart Reuben]

But isn't it valid to say, 'This is not going to change because too few people are strongly in favour of allowing people first to write down their move? Thus it is a fruitless discussion.'
I robustly defended adjournments and quickplay finishes continuing in the Laws. Without the help of Makro, the Deputy President, the latter would no longer be there.

[Michael Farthing]

Stewart, which way are you arguing here? By trhe sound of it only two of you were arguing for adjournments, so why was that discussion so fruitful?

[Joey Stewart]

So I don't see why this continues to generate discussion.

Perhaps because not everybody agrees with you?

Hey! He was agreeing with me- that makes him right by default.

[Stewart Reuben]

Michael >Stewart, which way are you arguing here? By trhe sound of it only two of you were arguing for adjournments, so why was that discussion so fruitful?<
Michael you didn't read my post accurately. I didn't say that I was one of only two people favouring continuing to include the adjournment regulations in the Laws. I said I had to defend their remaining there. It wasn't that difficult. I don't think it was voted on.
What was very difficult was retaining quickply finishes in the Laws. 3 Vice Presidents, the Deputy President, Geurt and Ashot (now the new chairman of the RC) all favoured their removal. That would have meant that, without increments, games would simply be played until one flag fell, or the game finished in one of the other ways. K+R vK+R would become a win for the player who had more time left - bringing the game into disrepute in my opinion. The voting of the whole meeting was a small majority to delete QPF. The commission members voted similarly.
Then, the following day, Makro spoke to Geurt and said he thought removing QPF completely was too divisive and they should remain in an Appendix. That wasn't democratic, but it was very good for chess. It wasn't debated at the General Assembly.

I expect, in due course, all FIDE Rated games will be played with an increment. What is holding that back is that BHB clocks are so reliable.

[Roger de Coverly]

What is holding that back is that BHB clocks are so reliable.

That and the requirement of some organisers that a time can be specified by which all games are guaranteed to have finished. Players too, if they have deadlines such as last bus, last or pre-booked train.

[Joey Stewart]

And also the fact that decent digital clocks cost so much that it would bankrupt most chess clubs if they were to buy them. Plus the uncertainty of shelling out all that money, only to find out that the clock is not up to standard.

I really think it would help if there was some sort of officially endorsed clock, as I am a strong supporter of incremental time controls but find it difficult to convince other clubs to switch over without being able to give them hard facts as to the reliability of any model.

[NickFaulks]

I expect, in due course, all FIDE Rated games will be played with an increment. What is holding that back is that BHB clocks are so reliable.

Do you mean any increment or one of at least 30 seconds?

I think the federations where BHB clocks are an issue form a small minority.

[Michael Farthing]

And also the fact that decent digital clocks cost so much that it would bankrupt most chess clubs if they were to buy them. Plus the uncertainty of shelling out all that money, only to find out that the clock is not up to standard.

I really think it would help if there was some sort of officially endorsed clock, as I am a strong supporter of incremental time controls but find it difficult to convince other clubs to switch over without being able to give them hard facts as to the reliability of any model.

Our club has a number of digital clocks: it comes up every year and we all think they're a good idea so we buy a couple more. Of course, new models have come out so we buy them. Unfortunately programming is different for each model so we have to learn how to use them. Well, more accurately, Sean learns how to use them and tries to persuade the rest of us to do so too. But why bother when Sean can do it in an instant? So we don't. And when Sean is not there they stay in the cupboard. When he is there he sets us one but the rest of us get bored waiting so we just use an analogue....

Pathetic isn't it?
Yes we know it is. But we still don't reform ourselves.

[Later addition:
There is hope: this year we have been joined by a nine year old girl who brings her own digital clock and makes us use it! The future is in our youth]

[MartinCarpenter]

That's a very familar sort of problem alas. A combination of laziness and frankly badly (verging on terribly) designed user interfaces/software in the clocks.

[Stewart Reuben]

Nick >Do you mean any increment or one of at least 30 seconds?<
No, I am referring to all FIDE Rated games, not just those for title norms. e.g. a local league with 3 hours to play the whole game might well use:
all the moves in 75 minutes + 5 seconds a move from the first.
120 moves would give 2 hours 50 minutes. Surely ample time.
The point about a minimum of 30 seconds increment is that then score must be kept throughout. The 5 second increment obviates the need for QPF and reduces unseemly time-scrambles.
Having two time controls is better, especially where there is no increment. This means that you can reach move 40, admittedly in a flurry of moves and then resume, including a toilet break. You get a more complete score of the game.

DGT Clocks are the moet reliable. You do not need one that can connect to a digital board. Many editions remain available even after new variations are being manfactured. They are not the cheapest. David Welcch is the fount of all human wisdom about these clocks in Britain.

People could break down and spend a little more on their hobby. This idea that chess has to be cheap bedevils British chess.

I know of only Britain and Mecico that are still using mechanical clocks. That doesn't mean there aren't other federations similarly placed. FIDE and the ECF could subisidise the purchase of new clocks.

You will find my and Eddie Price's thoughts on a Complete Information System in 'The Chess Organiser's Handbook Third Edition'. That section was written in 2003. The material which is still current can be found on the ECF website. The last sentence of the note reads:
There is little reason for a player to keep score or press a clock if these actions can be carried out by a machine.

[Joey Stewart]

What I dont understand is why they have to be so expensive - the technology needed to programme a digital clock is pretty primative, and the cost of materials is likely to be minimal (for a comparison with a similar product, look how cheap digital stopwatches are)
If there were one company endorsed by the ecf they would anticipate large orders and as a consequence it would allow them to mass produce such clocks and sell them at low prices to undercut their rivals.

League chess needs to be fairly cheap as it is primarily played by pensioners, children and the unemployed - affluent players make up the minority.

[Brian Towers]

What I dont understand is why they have to be so expensive - the technology needed to programme a digital clock is pretty primative, and the cost of materials is likely to be minimal (for a comparison with a similar product, look how cheap digital stopwatches are)
If there were one company endorsed by the ecf they would anticipate large orders and as a consequence it would allow them to mass produce such clocks and sell them at low prices to undercut their rivals.

League chess needs to be fairly cheap as it is primarily played by pensioners, children and the unemployed - affluent players make up the minority.

Joey, why not chat to Gareth Ellis?
I think his cheapest digital suitable for league chess (single period with increments) is about £22 which is cheaper than an analogue. It is also relatively simple to set.

[NickFaulks]

primarily played by pensioners, children and the unemployed

I wonder whether this will form the basis of an ECF publicity slogan.

[Gareth T Ellis]

Joey Stewart » Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:08 pm

What I dont understand is why they have to be so expensive - the technology needed to programme a digital clock is pretty primative, and the cost of materials is likely to be minimal (for a comparison with a similar product, look how cheap digital stopwatches are)
If there were one company endorsed by the ecf they would anticipate large orders and as a consequence it would allow them to mass produce such clocks and sell them at low prices to undercut their rivals.

The ECF wouldn't have an influence on it, manufacturers work on a global scale so one small country is totally insignificant.

The UK was about the most expensive place in Europe to buy DGT clocks, although DGT do sell directly they have distributors within different countries who set the local prices. I have a different approach to it , working on volume of sales, smaller profit per item but cheaper prices, the UK is now about the cheapest in Europe and a lot more of their clocks are selling. Having sold out on the DGT 2010 again yesterday , so yet another order is going in.

There are a lot of other manufacturers out there but until they can match or better DGT on product and price I wouldn't work with them.