New Time Control Idea

[Hal Bond]

Frankly I'm not sure if this idea is just new or new to me. After a most unpleasant situation last year when I had to impose an adjournment due to the closing time of the venue, this new time control came to mind.

The first period is straight time (say 90 minutes), no increment, no minimum number of moves. When it expires you then have (let's say) 5 minutes with a 30 second increment for the rest of the game. The advantage of the time control is that players still have time to record their moves, so the Arbiters are not tied down to a single game. It also gets the games finished earlier if the closing time of the venue (whether it is a weekender or a weekly club game) is an issue.

The Leap clocks can accommodate this TC as a custom setting. I haven't been able to get the DGT clocks to co-operate yet but I am no expert. The 2014 Candidates Tournament in Khanty Mansiysk did not have an increment in the first period but the move counter was in force.

I ran it by the FIDE QC and they are fine with it but not for 2400+ rated players, for which they require 4 hours of play based on a 60 move game. I told them it is possible if a player moves slowly enough in the first 90 minutes but they are unconvinced. I reminded them that they accept a 30 second delay on par with the Fischer increment, which doesn't guarantee 4 hours either, but no sale yet.

[John Brown]

I prefer delay time controls. You still get thinking time put if you overstep the delay then your clock goes to zero.

[Mario Moran-Venegas]

Try setting 12 in a North american dgt leaving the second TC set to zeros then the third TC can be set to bonus increment

[John Coleman]

Way back in the 80's, I played in a tournament in England with a time control of 48 moves in 120 minutes, then 10 minutes for the rest of the game. No digital clocks or increments, back in those days.

[Ferdinand Tejano Supsup]

Frankly I'm not sure if this idea is just new or new to me. After a most unpleasant situation last year when I had to impose an adjournment due to the closing time of the venue, this new time control came to mind.

The first period is straight time (say 90 minutes), no increment, no minimum number of moves. When it expires you then have (let's say) 5 minutes with a 30 second increment for the rest of the game.

When the time expires in the 1st period, the FLAG will come out but the clock still continues (depends on setting) but creates confusion.

The Leap clocks can accommodate this TC as a custom setting. I haven't been able to get the DGT clocks to co-operate yet but I am no expert. The 2014 Candidates Tournament in Khanty Mansiysk did not have an increment in the first period but the move counter was in force.

The DGT 3000 can be customize (manual set) to accommodate that time controls but you should use your existing clocks (resources).

The advantage of the time control is that players still have time to record their moves, so the Arbiters are not tied down to a single game. It also gets the games finished earlier if the closing time of the venue (whether it is a weekender or a weekly club game) is an issue.
.

With the North American DGT clocks, you can use an alternative time control of 60 minutes plus 30 seconds increment for the first 30 moves and followed by 30 minutes plus 30 seconds increment for the rest of the game. Another advantage of this time control is to encourage players to be on time for their games. With Option #16, the 30 minutes plus 30 seconds increment will be added to the remaining time from the 1st period once 30 moves is reached.

The 5 hour gap between rounds is quite ideal for a 90 minutes plus 30 seconds increment according to my experience. So far no problems.

[Hans Jung]

I have thought about your concept a lot Hal and I really like the idea. It moves the game to a rapid conclusion but gives enough time to think. We still would have the main body of the game with 90 minutes and then a reasonable conclusion. We could call it the Hal app or the Hal finishing touch (Im not being sarcastic) and I think it should be promoted as the main second time control at tournament play here in Canada.

[Patrick Kirby]

I don't really see the advantage of this time control as opposed to the commonly used 90 minutes +30 seconds from move 1. If you want to speed it up, maybe just reduce rhe increment to 15 or 10 seconds, or start at 60 minutes. But keeping the pace consistent through the game seems like a good thing to me.

[Tony Boron]

We used old FIDE rule G.4 for a few years (also to get out of the venue on time). Introduced an interesting dynamic, but eventually we just shortened the main body and introduced an increment from move 1.

Appendix G. Quickplay Finishes
G.1	A ‘quickplay finish’ is the phase of a game when all the remaining moves must be completed in a finite time.
G.2	Before the start of an event it shall be announced whether this Appendix shall apply or not.
G.3.	This Appendix shall only apply to standard play and rapidplay games without increment and not to blitz games.
G.4	If the player having the move has less than two minutes left on his clock, he may request that a time delay or cumulative time of an extra five seconds be introduced for both players, if possible. This constitutes the offer of a draw. If refused, and the arbiter agrees to the request, the clocks shall then be set with the extra time; the opponent shall be awarded two extra minutes and the game shall continue.

[Frank Dixon]

The faster the time control gets, the tougher it gets for the older generation of players. I am still adjusting to the 'single control, increment style' of play, which has wreaked havoc with my limited tournament results for 15 years. I have virtually stopped playing tournament chess as a result.

Despite that, I do enjoy playing G/30' with a 10'' increment; it is very tough to record the games once one gets short of time, however, and that is a drawback.

[Brad Thomson]

By definition, if you have a closing hour for your venue then you must be prepared to employ non-incremental time controls.

[Paul Leblanc]

I wouldn't throw out the adjournment option. Why impact all the games, and impose a time control that will confuse half the players to cater to a black swan possibility that one game will drag on beyond the venue closing time?

[Bob Armstrong]

Scarborough Chess Club "adjudicates" at 10 min. before exit time.

Bob A

[Henri Hughes]

The faster the time control gets, the tougher it gets for the older generation of players. I am still adjusting to the 'single control, increment style' of play, which has wreaked havoc with my limited tournament results for 15 years. I have virtually stopped playing tournament chess as a result.

Despite that, I do enjoy playing G/30' with a 10'' increment; it is very tough to record the games once one gets short of time, however, and that is a drawback.

this is interesting and shows a generational gap I guess you could see. I remember having to get used to the time control like the one at zonal when I was a youth. which usually was just me forgetting about the extra time control much as I did in our round one game at zonal last April.