To get or not to get: DGT 2010

I am on the verge of deciding if I should get a DGT 2010. It shall have 2 uses:

1) Hardcore Blitz

2) Scholastic 2 hour each game with inc

It might also be used in other events\

Get or not?

The DGT clocks are very good and easy to set. I see no reason to prefer the DGT 2010 over the DGT North American, which is only $40 on Amazon, $25 cheaper than the best price for the DGT 2010.

The only difference seems to be the FIDE logo.

There do seem to be some ads listing the DGT 2010 at very inflated prices.

Yes, "Time for a new clock?", the review of currently available clocks in September's Chess Life is very informative.

It's a shame that the USCF website doesn't allow direct linking to that article with all the pictures (at least not that I could figure out.)

Yes, but selective posting of articles like yours might attract new readers and generate more equipment sales for them.

/ I am a life USCF member.

I hope that Chess.com does eventually find a way to post your article directly. There are a lot of questions in these forums about what clocks to buy and yours seems to offer an intelligent comparison. 

There's an annoying (to me) bug in the NA version that I hit trying to set up a manual timing with base plus increment. Based on that and that DGT clocks are the only ones used in Australia (where equipment is supplied for tournaments, although it can be bad!) I would buy the 2010. The cost versus a tournament entry fee, petrol (gas) or accomodation isn't enough to buy the cheaper one.

Your milage (no metric equivalent!) may differ.

Personally from reviews I like the ZMF-II clocks, but if the button that pauses the clock when pressed again resets it instead of restarting it ... too different to the DGT clocks everyone local to me is used to. Sigh.

Enjoy whatever you buy, and have fun playing chess!

 I have owned and used all of the clocks mentioned in the Chess Life article/review as well as the Chronos model clocks and the DGT 2010.  And I have used them as well.

I wonder why the author, shack_2 on this forum, did not include the Chronos clocks at all.  There is a footnote where he says he tried to contact the manufacturer with no response.  So what?  Why not go ahead and include the Chronos clocks in the review?

The Chronos clocks have been used and currently are being used by a lot of players and are still offered to buy.  In my opinion these 2 models, Chronos II and Chronos GX, would be much better to review than the Omcor.  As the author noted in his review, the Omcor is not being used enough in tournaments to show its usability and reliability.

The DGT NA is designed for North America where the delay is the prominent option used.  The DGT 2010 is designed more and used more in Europe and other Eastern countries where the increment is the most used.  Otherwise the DGT 2010 and the DGT NA are the same clock with the same size displays and everything else.  Of course the body colors are different but that is totally cosmetic.

The DGT 3000 has a larger display and offers the delay, increment and Bronstein where the others above are limited in that.

For a little extra money, the DGT 3000 would be a newer, more feature enriched and better clock than either the DGT NA or DGT 2010.

And don't overlook the display size difference.  It is noticeable to the point that I either gave away or sold my DGT 2010 clocks, 2 of them, and DGT NA, 2 of them as well to keep the DGT 3000 instead.

That's an important aspect of any clock. The FIDE Tournament regulations state that the display must be readable at a distance of 3 meters (about 9 ft), and the player-on-move indicator must be visible at 10 meters (about 30 feet).

If either the DGT 2010 or DGT NA complies with these regulations, and they use the same hardware, then it should not be necessary to look for a clock with a larger display, unless you like to play Chess By Wandering Around (CBWA).

Well, that's fine and well but people reading that article will use the information when buying a new clock, not necessarily a new model on the market.

Plus the DGT NA is not new on the market either, nor is the ZMF-II.

I don't have one on hand to test with -- they're all at my local chess club -- but on a manual setting for time plus increment per move, I have been frustrated when the NA (but not the 2010) insists on adding one increment to the base time before play starts.

If I had one to test with, I'd post the exact button presses to produce the misbehaviour. Maybe mid next week if I remember and have time.

I suppose it is possible that the problem has been fixed (it is a programming bug, not  a hardware problem, I assume) but it is enough that I reach for  a 2010 for preference when someone wants a custom time control set up and doesn't know how to do it.

Despite that problem, for the tournament modes we use the NA is fine and we buy them in preference to the 2010 as they're cheaper and (seemingly, other than the colour) physically identical.

If I were buying a number and the NA did what I needed them for, I'd buy NAs. Buying one, I'd buy a 2010. I'm not familiar with the 3000 to have any opinion.

Is it worth considering the DGT 3000 over the 2010?

Considering they're virtually the same price on Amazon right now ($49 for the 2010 and $51.99 for the 3000), I'd say so.

Unfortunately, there's a 20$ difference on Amazon CA lol. Does it still worth it?

Adding one increment to the base time before the time starts is not a programming bug, it's suppose to work like that (and all of the DGT clocks work this way). Under FIDE and US Chess rules, the players get the increment time for move one. For example, for G/3;inc2 (three minutes with a two second increment), each player starts move one with 3:02, not 3:00, under FIDE and US Chess rules. 

The difference between the DGT 2010 and the DGT NA is that the DGT 2010 does the Bronstein form of delay and the DGT NA does the US (or simple) form of delay. 

I don't recommend the DGT 2010 since a lot of players aren't familiar with the Bronstein form of delay and you are just asking for confused opponents when using delay on this clock.

I don't recommend the DGT NA since when using delay, it doesn't show the delay countdown in digits and just has the word "delay" flash at you every second during the delay countdown. This makes it almost impossible to know when your delay time will end and when your base time will start counting down again which can be a big problem if you are in serious time pressure.

The DGT 3000 is one of the clocks I recommend. It does both forms of delay and for US delay, it shows the delay countdown in digits. It also has some other advantages over the DGT 2010 and DGT NA, such as it shows seconds at all times. 

Very nice and precise descriptions of the delay differences, @Micahsmith!

Thanks!