Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Enforcing Tournament Conditions


  • 3 months ago · Quote · #121

    mrhjornevik

    oki so stupid question her, but why would time outs make ratings less accurate? in blitz I guess most of victories are timeouts? 

    And wouldent the problem be solved by simply adding a 12 hour rating?

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #122

    AcidBadger

    mrhjornevik wrote:

    oki so stupid question her, but why would time outs make ratings less accurate? in blitz I guess most of victories are timeouts? 

    And wouldent the problem be solved by simply adding a 12 hour rating?

    Not a stupid question at all. There's a big difference with how time management is handled in blitz and correspondence chess. In blitz time management is very important, in correspondence chess it is absolutely irrelevant. When you're playing a 3/day game and your opponent runs out of time you can be certain that it's not because he was looking at the position for three days straight and just could not find a move.

    Adding a 12/hour rating would solve it, yes. 

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #123

    OzHawkeye

    AcidBadger wrote:
    mrhjornevik wrote:

    oki so stupid question her, but why would time outs make ratings less accurate? in blitz I guess most of victories are timeouts? 

    And wouldent the problem be solved by simply adding a 12 hour rating?

    Not a stupid question at all. There's a big difference with how time management is handled in blitz and correspondence chess. In blitz time management is very important, in correspondence chess it is absolutely irrelevant. When you're playing a 3/day game and your opponent runs out of time you can be certain that it's not because he was looking at the position for three days straight and just could not find a move.

    Adding a 12/hour rating would solve it, yes. 

    Well, I couldn't agree more with AcidBadger on all counts there.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #124

    jurassicmark

    OzHawkeye wrote:

    I'm finding it quite frustrating trying to run "Very Fast Play" tournaments, when I cannot enforce the conditions clearly spelled out in the Tournaments initial broadcast, because the site won't permit me.

    I have players in one I'm running right now, taking their maximum time (24 hours) to make each and every move, despite setting player speed to <3 hours in the initial settings and clearly stating what was expected of players before they signed up.

    Is there any way to be given the tools we, as TD's need, to eject players clearly not adhering to tournament conditions?

    The word "fast" is subjective.  And, adding the word "very" as in "very fast" adds nothing substantial to the word "fast."  You're just adding a subjective adverb to a subjective verb.  

    Now, suggesting a <3 hour move limitation is more concrete, but, as it has been pointed out, that limitation has to be more of an average since we sleep, work, etc. for more than three hours at a time.

    Under these conditions, I don't think you can improve on your "very fast" set-up.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #125

    OzHawkeye

    jurassicmark wrote:
    OzHawkeye wrote:

    I'm finding it quite frustrating trying to run "Very Fast Play" tournaments, when I cannot enforce the conditions clearly spelled out in the Tournaments initial broadcast, because the site won't permit me.

    I have players in one I'm running right now, taking their maximum time (24 hours) to make each and every move, despite setting player speed to <3 hours in the initial settings and clearly stating what was expected of players before they signed up.

    Is there any way to be given the tools we, as TD's need, to eject players clearly not adhering to tournament conditions?

    The word "fast" is subjective.  And, adding the word "very" as in "very fast" adds nothing substantial to the word "fast."  You're just adding a subjective adverb to a subjective verb.  

    Now, suggesting a <3 hour move limitation is more concrete, but, as it has been pointed out, that limitation has to be more of an average since we sleep, work, etc. for more than three hours at a time.

    Under these conditions, I don't think you can improve on your "very fast" set-up.

    Neither do I jurassicmark, there's only so much you can do if players sign up to tournaments either not reading the summarys play requests, or simply chosing to ignore them.

    I've suggested as an alternative to granting TD's the power to remove players, a 12-hour time control be added. While a lot of players wouldn't be keen to play 12-hour time control tournaments, there is quite a few who would from the experiences I've had TD'ing tournaments so far, and it would be a nice addition for players looking for a very fast correspondence tournament.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #126

    jurassicmark

    OzHawkeye wrote:

    I hardly think 12 hours equates to live chess. Nor have I ever suggested in this thread that I was expecting people to make moves every 3 hours.

    I'm a big advocate for longer default time controls in live chess (which seems to elicit almost zero response from the staff or the community).  So, personally,  I second your outside the box position sir!

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #127

    jurassicmark

    A 12 hour online time control would appeal to exactly two types of people: anybody without a job (I'm not being sarcastic), and the ENTIRE rest of the world which is plugged into the internet 24/7 and, on a routine basis checks their media device constantly.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #128

    OzHawkeye

    jurassicmark wrote:

    A 12 hour online time control would appeal to exactly two types of people: anybody without a job (I'm not being sarcastic), and the ENTIRE rest of the world which is plugged into the internet 24/7 and, on a routine basis checks their media device constantly.

    Yes, I'd agree with that also. Despite my hectic job, I carry my mobile devices with me (indeed, I use them for work substantially), and often can bang out a move or two on the go.


Back to Top

Post your reply: