Re: Alternative time clock scheme

Didn't we go over this already? With "Bronstein" (non-cumulative
addback), your clock starts running as soon as your opponent presses
the button, but, when you _stop_ your clock, it adds back time
(typically, though not necessarily, five seconds), up to a maximum of
the time you had when your clock started. Under "delay," used by USCF,
your clock does not _start_ counting down until a set period (like
five seconds) has elapsed. Mathematically, the effects are identical,
though there might be a small psychological difference if you were in
extreme time pressure.

Interesting!  What is the difference?

Especially because the standard USCF delay is not Bronstein.

It's *equivalent* to Bronstein - but it's not the same thing, at all.

Yes it does!  It calls it `Bronstein delay', like the rest of the
world, the USCF included.

Regardless of my nationality or that of the author, I see no reason to
credit Bronstein's system to the USCF.

Dave.

The DGT page is probably correct, but it was obviously written by a
non-English-speaker, and probably a non-chess-player, so it's a little
hard to be sure. The Wikipedia page is incomplete, as it does not
mention non-addback delay, used almost exclusively in U.S.
tournaments. (Probably written by a Euro.) I may modify it, but it's
not high on my list of priorities.

For the same reason he calls Turing machines "Turing engines"?

The Kasparov delay does exist, but has only been used once, on
the 26th move of game 2 of the 1987 Karpov vs. Kasparov title
match.  It never really caught on, and even Kasparov himself
avoided it after that one experiment.

Please read the following URLs:
http://www.dgtprojects.com/clock_timingmethods.htm#bronstein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_clock#Delay_clocks

If you disagree with them please provide your sources.

You should care whether Bronstein gets credit for what Bronstein
invented and whether Fischer gets credit for what Fischer invented.

(And I should have checked before my original post rather than
going by memory...)

Why would you attribute that method to Kasparov? It's the USCF
standard, and has been so since the early 90s.

There are essentially three "delay" methods. The USCF ("time delay")
doesn't start the clock for x seconds after the button has been
pushed. The "Bronstein" method starts counting down immediately, but
adds x seconds when you stop your clock, up to a max of the time you
had when you clock started. The effect is _almost_ identical to the
first, though there is a tiny difference if you are very short of
time. The "Fischer" method is the same as Bronstein, except that your
time can accumulate without limit. If you want to argue about the
names, go ahead (though I don't plan to listen), but these are the
options available if you want to design a new time control.

4. There is also Kasparov delay, which doesn't add time, but doesn't count
time for X seconds.  Phil Innes

You are correct.  I apologize; in my haste I mentally confused
the three major methods (Fischer, Bronstein, FIDE) and somehow
managed to insert the term "USCF" in there.  Sorry about that.

http://www.dgtprojects.com/clock_timingmethods.htm#bronstein

I once did nothing but play chess for over a week while sitting
in the bunker next to a launchpad as the countdown got stopped
or reset multiple times.  Got the bird into orbit at the end,
though!

Your `USCF-style delay' is usually credited to David Bronstein, rather
than the USCF.

Are people not already doing this?  Starting with only twenty minutes
on the clock seems a bit short for serious games, even with a
three-minute increment, but the basic idea is very sound.

At work, I don't have time for six-hour games of chess!  

Dave.

I am not saying this is a good idea as it stands,
but rather I am throwing it out there as a thought
experiment to see if someone comes up with a better
variation.

For comparison, let's start with a 40/120, D/60 time
control with a USCF-Style delay of 5 seconds.

Replace the USCF-style the delay with a Fischer increment
(meaning 5 seconds are added to your clock when you hit
the button rather than the clock waiting 5 seconds
before starting to count down -- the difference being
that with a Fischer delay you can gain time by moving
quickly).

Now replace the 40/120, D/60 with SD/10 or SD/20, but
with the Fischer delay set to 3 minutes.

This, of course, wouldn't make matches end by the next
round, but when playing a club game or a game at work,
it would avoid the rather artificial "race until the
time control changes then relax" effect.