IS THIS the answer to the 1st holiday question special, 2012?

why allow the computers to play after move 40?

From my point of view i think this is a great idea and the long time control just love it.cant wait for the results!

The idea looks outdated, to say it in a politically correct way.

An interesting, non-standard idea, worth exploring.  

After all, not that many games reach past move 40, yet computers have always been stigmatized and reviled, rather than used in creative ways.  This sound like an attempt worth the try.

I like it.   Computers, work as a good team with humans,  for Deep Blue to beat Kasparov it took an excellent preperation team to help Deep Blue.   It scares me though that many players will just agree to a draw instead of deal with the adjournment.

I love the idea of this, and I like that Muzychuk was invited. Chess needs to be more integrated between the genders. FIDE seems to have tip-toed around when to fully integrate chess, always worrying about when the time was right. A non-FIDE rated event is a great place to start. Moreover, the format allows the game, not the players, to be showcased. The adjournment still makes me uncomfortable, but at least the games produced will be top-notch.

yes, no big fuss about adjornment. If tournament isn't rated there shouldn't be too much of a big deal

I believe that all 2700+ Tournaments should be played at 2.5hrs for the first 40 moves and then 120min for each of the subsequent next 20 moves until the end of the game without adjournments. This should create higher quality games at the top level.

I don't know why everyone's making such a big deal about the adjournment issue. Yes, the players can go off and analyse games with their computers, and yes they can find if they're won/lost, or how to draw, or what have you, but NO, that does not mean that the "best" line will appear on the board the next day, YES, the players will still have to think for themselves, and at the end of the day, the ACP will probably realise that adjournment doesn't work anymore, and it'll never happen again.

The tournament isn't rated, so what's wrong with giving adjournments a shot? I predict it'll make very little difference, and professional organisations won't bother with them anymore after this. It's hardly a crime though :P

This will be interesting, and not as predictable as we might think.

@BuddyT:  What if someone consults his tablebase and discovers that he is lost in an optically-drawn endgame (and he knows his opponent is seeing the same thing), so he intentionally deviates from the tablebase "optimal line" just to make his opponent think for himself?  It sounds to me like these endgames could require just as much preparation as any opening!

@TimmanRevenge: keep your idiocracy to yourself...

Going back to the future is a great idea.Mark my words.This is the future.Old is gold.Adjournment is an innovative concept which will stretch chess beyond the concept of openings and depth will shift from current obsession with openings at almost every level of play to  middlegame/endgame , both phases being far richer in chess ideas.

Yep, I wish they'd never taught computers to play chess.

I still think from move 40, unless its an endgame (where we have only a few key and absurd looking moves), there will be no way for anybody to memorize every possible path the computer spits out.

Nice...so glad to see an old fashioned time control with an adjournment! 

None of this "increment" stuff...

I hate the computers, i wish to destroy all programs of the world.

I like the longer time controls but the inclusion of adjournments is just stupid. What is the value of having the players return to the board the next day to play out the lines their computers and tablebases calculated the night before. Every one of us can just as easily play out those moves immediately after the adjournment using our own computers.

We would get the same practical result if instead of adjourning the game, we simply used the computer to adjudicate the position at the end of the first time control. Just plug the position into the computer, and ten minutes later it will have calculated the optimal concluding line and the final result. Why wait until the next day for the players to show us the same thing?

@ mishanp - thanks! I wasn't sure about it, but I noticed your article and decided to take your word for it!   I'll remove that now.

I also meant to credit you for the quotes I used.  Thanks

Back to the old days of not changing the fundamental characteristics of the position prior to adjournment. Also, seal as often as you can.