Worth Adding a Classic Time Control?

That's exactly what I am hoping for in the (soon to be) classic time control.  For me, '30 | Anything' would be fantastic.

I really don't care too much if it has it's own rating. Lichess is good that way though, rapid and classical. They probably don't want to copy Lichess! LOL. How a 10 0 and a 90 30 can be the same rating on this site is strange.

*** YESSS!!!!***

Awesome.  Terrific.  That's just great.

So, just one more request:  most chess instructors say that the fastest "slow chess" is 30 minutes.  So, if you do classical, can you set the lower limit to 30 minutes?

(And, while I'm at it: add 30|10, 30|30, and 45|45 to your list of buttons?)

Also -- just out of curiosity: does that mean going back and retroactively "moving" all the prior longer games *out* of rapid's calculation and into the new classification?  (I wasn't around when the time controls for rapid changed)

This is great news.  Thanks, and thanks to the team!

Great news! Looking forward to it!

Looking forward to classical ratings. Thank you, Chess.com!

That's great news!

A Classical rating for games of 30|0 and up that reasonably approximates a USCF OTB rating would be ideal.

A Classical rating would also encourage more players to consider participating in USCF events. 

I typically play 10|0 for fun and relaxation. I would love the challenge of playing some online tournaments in the 30|x to 60|x range. That's enough time to make me put more effort into a game without it becoming burdensome. That changes my thought process from instantly playing the first move that pops into my head to being able to evaluate a couple of candidate moves, and more deeply evaluate how the sequence might play out. 

To understand how to improve at all time controls, It would be beneficial for players to have access to some basic comparison of metrics that highlight how relative strengths, weaknesses, and general quality of play change as we move from Blitz to Rapid to Classical time controls. 

45|45 is already a button.

When 10|0 moved to Rapid the site bumped the rapid rating up if the blitz was higher, but no games were retroactively changed. I would image something similar might be done in this instance.

Yes, 45/45 is a button, thanks.  (I'd love to see 30/10 and 30/30 also, as I see a number of folks playing it -- no doubt due to the fact that some clubs here play those games).

Your comparison of what happened when 10/0 move to Rapid doesn't make sense to me (meaning, *I* can't figure it out), because there, Rapid already existed.  In this case, Classical doesn't exist.  My question is (not that it matters, I'm just curious) will my 30 and 45 minute games that I've already played get put into that mix?  Or does everybody start with a fresh slate of zero Classically-rated games?  (And, if the latter, where do you "start" such a rating?)

Thanks for continuing to engage us on this.  This is a very exciting development. 

Classical Time control statistics would make chess.com more user friendly

I'm not part of those discussions, but my guess is that old time control games that would qualify for the new category, will remain as Rapid, same as old 10|0 showing as blitz. My other guess is that the site might initialize the classic rating to the same as Rapid, if the member has relatively recent rapid games.

Update here: due to the size of our game archive tables, adding this is going to be very difficult. Altering a table that large can take months! We are looking at solutions, but it's not just a matter of "wanting" to do it. There are major technical constraints. That said, we are planning to add both Classical and Hyper time controls. Thank you for your patience! It's unfortunate that things we want to do today are impacted by technical decisions made in 2007 :/ 

Story of my life. 

Thanks for the update.  I think it's fair to say I speak for many, many people when I say we are really looking forward to the addition of a classical rating system, and we greatly appreciate all the work being done to make it happen.

Cheers!!

Perhaps the old games could be left as are (e.g., all old 45|45 games would count as "rapid" and only new 45|45 games would count as "classical")?

Hyper?  What's that?

I think we currently have:

• Bullet - For games under 3 minutes.
• Blitz - For games over 3 minutes but under 10 minutes.
• Rapid - For games 10 minutes and longer.

I'm guessing (hoping) Classical will be 30 minutes and longer.

So what would "Hyper" be?

Hyper would be a short form for Hyper Bullet, meaning games of 30 seconds or less. 

I know this is an unsolicited opinion, and basically no one cares, but I really do think "hyper chess" should be renamed "twitch chess", because that's, in essence, all it is.

Oh, maybe twitch.com (and, by extension, Amazon) would have something to say about that. Too bad.

Based in the comment by @erik, the technical issue is the issue is the adding of additional DB fields to accommodate additional pools, and has nothing to do with the definition of them. 

Then it's a very unfortunate DB design. I would hope such a feature request could be solved by adding new DB tables and views and modifying existing queries and procedures, without any modifications in existing tables. It's tough to predict future changes in DB schemas in general, though.

Design decisions back in 2007, don't forget, the year the iPhone was introduced!, could never have anticipated the extent of the success of Chess.com. Imagining daily volumes, 200,000+ players and 10,000,000+ games, would have been unimaginable. The storage requirements for the game archives alone would have been unimaginable.

Chess.com does a great job evolving,, upgrading and incorporating new technologies, and responding the user's appetites'.  Each day the beast of a database gets bigger and bigger. The technical challenges must be daunting.

Good job Chess.com