Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Time Control Changes?

  • 7 weeks ago · Quote · #281



    The reason for increments in online, or delay OTB is to allow a player who has achieved a won position to be able to quickly play through to completion. The increment or delay helps avoid "ruined" games and is great in OTB for time scramble.

  • 7 weeks ago · Quote · #282


    hreedwork wrote:


    The reason for increments in online, or delay OTB is to allow a player who has achieved a won position to be able to quickly play through to completion. The increment or delay helps avoid "ruined" games and is great in OTB for time scramble.

    I understand the thinking, but I don't completely buy the premise. I played in a number of OTB 90/0 tournaments. The vast majority of games were finished long before anyone reached "time trouble." True, there were some few games which came down to scrambles.

    In those games, the player with the won position often either won on the board or won on time. Occasionally, there might be a so-called "ruined" game where he lost. However, allowing a delay or increment would have helped most, and perhaps most often, in games where the player with the won position was the only one in time trouble. In such cases, a game he should have lost due to poor clock management would be turned into a victory. This creates a whole new class of "ruined" games, by penalizing the player who manages his time better.

    I can perhaps see increments or delays in short time controls, but not in long ones, and 30 seconds or more seems extravagant in the extreme, as the clock can be made to go backwards -- clearly an aberrant situation. If you were talking about 90/2 or perhaps 90/5, I might concede the point. I still, and will always feel that 90/30 is just an absurdity.

  • 7 weeks ago · Quote · #283


    @Bur, I was explaining the rationale of USCF and U.S. National TDs, not my own opinion. You'd have to make your points with them.

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #284


    KEEP 5/2 but rest is ok also add 10I5, 10I10, 3I1, 10I5, and 5I5 mabye 90I30 is too long, probably ending up few hours.

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #285


    Bur_Oak wrote:
    hreedwork wrote:. I still, and will always feel that 90/30 is just an absurdity.

    But if you play in FIDE sanctioned event you will run into somethinlike  90/30 from moce one upto move sixty and then 10 minutes to finnish game.  Somehow one must make the 120 minutes up .

    For some reason 120 minutes guillotin is not preferred.


    So 90/30 here would match many OTB conditions. Though very few players play like they would play otb.No matter what time controls

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #286


    @Petrip, not sure how the quote function works but I never said 90/30 here is an absurdity. Must be a cut/paste malfunction.

    Regarding 90/30 in live on chess.Com, the Dan Heisman Learning Center group has a big swiss tournament that will start soon. So the time control does have its following here...

    Take care

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #287


    hreedwork: I was not quoting you but Bur_Oak.


    Yes there is following. And it would match OTB. Though it will never be popular. Internet chess wil allwasys be faster than OTB

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #288


    @Petrip, I absolutely agree with you that the majority of chess on the Internet is and will range from fast to super fast. The 45/45 and 90/30 crowd who want to emulate Club and Tournament OTB will be the minority. Hopefully a solid minority that can get support from the platform servers. But definitely much smaller than the 3 and 5 min crew.

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #289


    funny thing though.. getting a 45/45 usually succeeds with short wait so it is OK. But the new fide standard blitz 3/2 has ABSOLUTELY no on playing it. I've tried several times a seek lasting for a 5 minutes and never a game

    It is not on it's way to become 5min replacement without some marketing. Perhaps the 5 min tournaments should be made to 3/2. If such a change is wanted

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #290


    what about just having all of the above

    5/2, 3/2, 30/0, and 25/5

  • 6 weeks ago · Quote · #291


    @petrip, I don't get a chance to seek much due to my schedule. Interesting observation...

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #292


    I don't care. I play 1/0 and 2/1 and 3/0

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #293


    please dont remove 5/2 blitz i play it very much 

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #294


    chessdragonboge wrote:

    what about just having all of the above

    5/2, 3/2, 30/0, and 25/5

    Problem with too many time variants is that seek times increase. Chess.com is the biggest site so I guess it can split players to many pools but anyway 8-10 is probably the number that gets you an opponent in few seconds.  30/0 and 25/5 would attract about the bunch and make unnecessary pool split

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #296


    Dale wrote:

    Is it true that default time control seeks are not displayed on the seek graph as dots?

    This is Okay only for those time controls with too many dots.

    For time controls without lots of dots to display this would cause folks to wait too long for a game.

    I agree. In addition, I think it would be a good idea to have dots for the standard time controls as well, something like the ones for tournaments and special events.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #297


    When I played chess, some 35 years ago, there were very few OTB tournaments to finish to death; only 1/2 hour games (now rapid chess) 15 minute and 5 minute games were played to death. "Normal" chess OTB was played in 16-20 moves per hour, with a time control after the first 2-2.5 hours (usually moves 36-40), as most games used to finish after less than 40 moves.

    When Fischer "invented" the incremental time control, the only thing he had in mind, was to surrender those ruined games GM's used to have, because of bad time managing. I do not think it was because of his losses due to wrong time management, but thinking in those who like to see a good chess game. And a wonderful chessgame played for 20 moves, is really ruined for the next 20 moves played in a minute!!! Even if the final result is fair!

    The problem seems to be that after FIDE adopted 90+30 as the official timing for normal chess and eliminated the game adjournments, the games are lasting longer and you start using 30 seconds after move 25 and finish the game at move 50 or 60, playing most of the game in time trouble (not scrambling, but time trouble)! You cannot stand up for relax, you cannot go for a smoke or to eat something, nor even go to the toilet!! And, off course, you do not have time for a deep thought!

    I think it's time to recognize the error and correct it, as it is done in highest level chess: make a time control (at move 40, e.g.) and add 30 min for the next 20 moves and then go for 30 seconds.

    I think this should be the general rule of tumb. Exceptions are always admited and will always exist!!


    Best Regards to all

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #298



    I used to play 5+0 in the old times, but it was just fun!

    5+2 and 3+2 seem to be popular among top players and FIDE. I think 5+2 is just a little improvment in 5+0. On the other side, 3+2, which I tried recently, seems to be only an improvment on 3+0!!!!!

    I read somewhere that a psychologic study had been conducted and the minimal mean time to make a reasonable chess move, was 6 seconds. Including the time to make the move and the time to stop the clock. So, if you want incremental for blitz, I would suggest you give a try to 1+6 or 2+5.

    I have tried it here at chess.com. I became a fanatic supporter of 1+6!! You have the chance to make good moves of chess and mostly you never lose on time!!  So it seems bad for the "good time management" supporters! But I think time is just to make the practicability of chess. The game itself IS what matters!!

    If you want to contest me, please go to your chess club and try it for a dozen games. Talk just afterwards and use your experience. Chess is an empirycal matter.

Back to Top

Post your reply: