THE IDEAL CHESS CLOCK?
by Jorge Amador
I was interested to read Bill Smythe's
critique of electronic chess clocks
and the subsequent discussion in other posts. Because I have an analog
clock and USCF rules mandate that digital clocks with a time-delay feature
are preferable to mine, I have been forced to use a number of different
digital clocks in recent years. Here are my observations.
1) The displays on most digital clocks feature big blinking dots and large
numerical readouts that keep changing as one's time decreases. I can
understand why many people might consider this attractive, but I find the
blinking dots and changing numerals to be highly distracting out of the
corner of my eye, to the point where sometimes I simply have to avert my
gaze.
2) I like to get up during the game and walk around in order to relax and
to clear my head. In such cases it is very useful to be able to see from a
distance (and especially from behind the clock) whose move it is, so that
if my opponent has made a move I can rush back to the board. This is not a
problem with any mechanical clock I have ever seen: the plungers are
located on top of the clock case and one can easily notice that one plunger
is higher than the other, from any angle and at distances up to several
yards.
With one exception (which I shall get to below), in the case of digital
clocks it is difficult or impossible to tell whose move it is unless one is
sitting at the board or standing near it. Some clocks are designed in such
a way that one just can't tell whose move it is from behind the clock.
(Which, incidentally, is also annoying when you're watching somebody else's
game and all the other spectators are already on the side of the board
where the clock's turn indicator is visible.) Other digital clocks feature
levers so small that one cannot see from a distance which of them is
pressed; still others have dim red lights on the plungers that are equally
difficult to discern in a brightly lit playing hall from more than a few
feet.
3) Unlike Bill Smythe, I have not found the character vs. background
contrast on the digital displays to be inadequate. Indeed, I would not mind
it if they had less contrast, so that the blinking dots would not be so
distracting. But I do find that in mounting time pressure it takes a
fraction longer to interpret the numbers on a digital display than it does
to see the minute hand on an analog face in relation to the 12 o'clock
position.
4) Finally, the digital clocks that I've seen all appear to light up or to
start flashing or even beeping when one player runs out of time. I consider
this contrary to the spirit of the laws of chess, which to my understanding
indicate that it is the opponent's responsibility to notice a time forfeit
without outside help or prompting.
Because I have grown tired of being forced to aquiesce to the use of these
poorly designed digital clocks in lieu of my beloved Jerger, I have been
looking for an electronic model free of such basic flaws. After several
months of searching, I believe that I have found the (almost) ideal model:
the Gardé electronic chess clock.
With its squarish shape and Spartan exterior, this timepiece will not win
any awards for beauty, but it does seem to address neatly all my practical
concerns about digital clocks. It has both an analog face for immediate
comprehension of the time remaining, and a digital readout for precise
accounting of the seconds left when so desired. The display is small and
unobtrusive, so neither the blinking asterisk nor the bar graph serves to
distract. When a player's time runs out, his flag falls for the opponent to
see or to miss as his own internal level of alertness would permit. And it
is the only electronic clock I've seen which retains the traditional
top-of-the-case plungers with clear differences in relative height when one
or the other is pressed, so that I can tell whose move it is from far away
and from any direction.
The Gardé clock is not perfect, of course. As Bill Smythe points out, the
analog hands dart from minute to minute instead of moving along smoothly. But then, I rely on the hands to give me an immediate impression of the
time left; when I want exact knowledge, I can read the digital display. In
a tournament setting I would, however, warn my opponent about the way the
hands move.
Nor is the fact that the hands do not stop squarely at every minute marker
a problem for me -- it is the electronic system, and not a spring device,
which keeps track of the time and controls the movement of the hands, so
that when the digital readout reaches zero, the minute hand moves forward
and makes the flag fall even if the hand had appeared to be a little before
or after the one-minute marker. There is no question of a hanging flag
falling sooner than one might have expected.
I do concur with Mr. Smythe's suggestion to tell my opponent to watch the
digital display and not the hands when he gets down to a couple of minutes,
but I see no reason to dramatically stop the game in the middle to say so
-- just a reminder at the start of the game will do nicely, helping to
avoid acrimonious time-forfeit disputes.
To me these are minor drawbacks, not fatal flaws. My main complaint about
the Gardé has to do with the difficulty in programming it. The instruction
manual reads like an English translation of Japanese directions by a German
(the clock is made in Germany). It took a training session with an
experienced Gardé user, my friend Steve Coladonato, to discover how to
activate the time-delay feature. And neither of us has yet figured out how
to deal with long games. The Gardé clock can be set to recognize one
primary time control and only up to two secondary time controls. Because
our club has (thankfully) resisted the trend toward sudden-death controls,
this could become an issue in games going into the fourth time control.
Perhaps we could reset the clock to start as if it were a new game, with
the time left to each player entered as the new primary time control.
But that's a bridge we will cross when we get to it. In the meantime, I
will use the Gardé and happily walk around the playing hall in the
knowledge that I can tell whose move it is wherever I may be in the room,
while enjoying all the benefits of precision electronics and of both analog
and digital displays.
Editor's comment: I disagree with point 4, "Finally, the digital clocks that I've seen all appear to light up or to start flashing or even beeping when one player runs out of time. I consider this contrary to the spirit of the laws of chess, which to my understanding indicate that it is the opponent's responsibility to notice a time forfeit without outside help or prompting."
My view is
reflected in the rule 42B of the rulebook: "Signaling devices.
A clock that calls attention to the fall of the flag with a special noise or
light is both legal and highly desirable, providing it causes no disturbance to
other players. The prohibition against anyone but the two players calling
a flag down does not apply to a clock, which can carry out this function
thoroughly and impartially. Likewise, a clock in which the fall of one
flag prevents the other flag from falling is both legal and desirable, avoiding
the possibility of the both-flags-down draw of 14G or 16T."
ChessNews.org homepage