I don't want analog.

On several chess supply sites, they differentiate "Chronos" from "Digital", yet both are digital. Is the Chronos worth all that extra money (~double the price of other digital clocks)? Which do you recommend, and why?

The Chronos is far and away the best chess clock I've ever used. I have had mine for many many years without any problems. I've seen other clocks with buttons falling off, etc.

 

  I currently use the DGT2000 and have had no problems with it

What do you guys think about Excalibur Game Timer II Digital Chess Clock?  I'm looking to get one but the low price makes me wonder if its a good clock.

Thanks

The Excalibur is not a bad clock, but the buttons can get sticky, and they often make a loud CLACK when you whack them. (A result of these two factors is that you have to whack the button twice, just to make sure, and thus you get two loud clacks.)

I love my Chronos. Sure, it was expensive, but my plan was to buy *one* chess clock--not "one clock until this one breaks"--and the Chronos is a tank. This probably won't be an issue if you're simply playing tournament chess; but if you are a blitzer, keep in mind that the clock will fall off the table from time to time as you scramble through those last seconds.

PS: The Chronos is not as hard to set as some reviewers suggest.

DimKnight wrote:

The Excalibur is not a bad clock, but the buttons can get sticky, and they often make a loud CLACK when you whack them. (A result of these two factors is that you have to whack the button twice, just to make sure, and thus you get two loud clacks.)

I love my Chronos. Sure, it was expensive, but my plan was to buy *one* chess clock--not "one clock until this one breaks"--and the Chronos is a tank. This probably won't be an issue if you're simply playing tournament chess; but if you are a blitzer, keep in mind that the clock will fall off the table from time to time as you scramble through those last seconds.

PS: The Chronos is not as hard to set as some reviewers suggest.

---

Thank you DimKnight for your answer.  I don't think I will get the Excalibur for the reasons you mentioned.  You mentioned Chronos but what do you think about DGT 2010 Chess Clock (in case you had some experience with it)?  After some research I'm convinced that I will get one of the two (Chronos or DGT 2010).

i have not used a chess clock in years... im sorry i cant help but this talk about chess clocks reminds me that i want to play OTB again. I only have a turnier analog clock which needs upgrading to FIDE approved digital clock i guess.

I am happy with the blue Saitek clock.  My kids and I bang away at it and it seems pretty bulletproof. 

can someone enlighten me on the reason for having a clock, and what the rules are about the use of them? I've heard after so many moves u get another hour to make so many more. I just never got it?!?......help?!?

    thanx, Ray

dcarwin wrote: I am happy with the blue Saitek clock.  My kids and I bang away at it and it seems pretty bulletproof. 

---

 I have played using a Saitek before, pretty good clock. Cant ask for more, although i remember sometime in a tournament where someone objected to using one because it wasnt FIDE recognised. Maybe im wrong?!

 

To chessstudent; there are different time controls. For example, both players start the game with 1hour 30mins, then after 36 moves(blacks 36th) both players recieve an additional 15mins. The conditions could be 2hours and after 40 moves 15 min addition with another 15 added after 60 or something. The playing conditions are given before you enter a tournament so you will be well informed. Most cases will be 1 hour 30mins (up to 2hours) with no additional time.

Ray,

Another good reason to have a clock is time handicapping.  You can set the clock to give yourself less time than your opponent, and thereby give them an advantage.  This can be a better/alternative  handicap (sometimes) than just starting a piece down.

-Dan 

I've got a DGT XL, and I love it.  It can be programmed with pretty much any timing method under the sun, and it's a pleasure to play with. 

 

I also play pretty regularly with my friend's Chronos, and it's an excellent clock as well.  My two issues with the Chronos are 1. it's a bit counter-intuitive to program the clock: you have to use an arcane series of button presses, whereas the DGT is much easier to work with; and 2. the Chronos is a bit on the big & heavy side--the perfect clock to get if you want to bludgeon someone to death after the match to be sure.  ;-)

After playing with both I chose the Excalibur over the Chronos.   It's just much easier to use.  I do love the aesthetic of the Chronos though.

Graw81> Saitek... someone objected to using one because it wasnt FIDE recognised.

I'm just buying a new clock. It looks like only the DGT 2010 (previously the DGT 2000) and DGT XL are FIDE-approved... so your opponent (or you!) might be able to force its use in FIDE-rated events. In USCF events, all digital time-delay clocks are considered equal.

Does FIDE have a relationship with DGT? It would be disappointing if FIDE was essentially approving their own product.

 

A quick internet search leads me to believe that the Chronos has never been submitted for testing by FIDE. Does anyone know details on this? I've never used the DGT, but compared to excalibur, saitek, and a few others, the Chronos is a fantastic clock. 

Loomis> Does FIDE have a relationship with DGT?

Yes, FIDE and DGT have a contract. In return for being declared the official clock of FIDE, DGT pays FIDE 7% royalty fees. FIDE is allowed to add more official clocks if (and only if) they notify DGT in advance and use a fair and transparent testing process.

A Saitek clock was submited and tested but rejected because it wasn't possible to see whose clock was running from a distance of upto 10m.

The 'Silver' clock was tested and almost accpeted, but ultimately rejected because DGT revealed it doesn't time the 3rd time period correctly (and its maker agrees). Not an issue for most amateurs, but a serious one for GMs.

Chronos clocks have never to my knowledge been tested (or even submitted for testing)...  but everyone says they're a great clock and sturdy!

It sounds like a bad system to me. The maker of the best clock will presumably have a large enough market share that paying a royalty to FIDE for their approval wouldn't be worth it. But the maker of the second best clock will be able to increase their market share by paying FIDE the royalty. Thus ensuring the official FIDE clock is always the second best clock.