I like 30 second increment for tournament games.
5 seconds is kinda pointless for long games.
The idea, of course, is so you can't lose in an easily winning position.
Should FIDE get rid of increment !?
Sort:
sammy_boi wrote:
I like 30 second increment for tournament games.
5 seconds is kinda pointless for long games.
The idea, of course, is so you can't lose in an easily winning position.
TLDR;
No FIDE shouldn't get rid of increment because chess games should be won primarly by chess skill not time. Winning by time should be still possible but reduced to a minimum.
Increment doesn't save you if you're slow.
I agree with @sammy_boi . The clock is a part of the game but it shouldn't be the most deciding factor in winning a game. Bullet is an exception here
Clocks were introduced in the early day of chess to prevent people from thinking about moves for
days (!) about a move.
But in the end we still want won positions to be won because of chess skill not time. This just makes more sense.
If you're a hopeless time waster the increment won't save you. The quality of your moves decreases over time if you waste too much time because you will have less time to choose, calculate and evaluate your moves.
Managing your time is not necessarily easier in long time controls. I know people who are brilliant blitz players and yet usually get into time trouble in classic games. It's like playing a different game. Of course if that happens it's the player's fault. But the point of increment, as Bronstein said, is not coming into a situation where you are entitled to make a move but it is phisically impossible.
Why do we need it anyway ?
I mean sure sure I got it , like bullet or blitz time controls it's necessary no doubt about that.
Rapid time controls debateble I mean you have 45 minutes each and you can't manage your time?
Classical time controls COME ON! 2,3,4,5 hours per game and you still need increment! !!???? For what? 5 hours is not enough for you to manage opening and middle game? Well if it not enough for you,then play FASTER !
My point is , it's ridiculous even in rapid , that some players can't manage their time correctly or weaker and slower in the opening or a middle game and then they have plenty of time for the endgame. If you are to slow or weak in the opening or middle game you shouldn't move to the endgame practice more on first two stages.
Time management isn't it hole point in chess, when you are playing on time?