Yeah I've switched to another site until chess.com address the issue. The current system is badly flawed and encourages people to guess the moves rather than calculate properly.
You don't have unlimited time to figure out a position when you are playing. Why should you have three weeks to solve a position when you are given the advantage of knowing that a tactic is available? Surely 160 seconds offers more than enough time for getting beyond a mere guess in most situations. These are not usually asking you to figure out the finishing combinations that won the Immortal Game.
I am someone who often runs up against time controls in real games. I like the fact that I have to approach the problems somewhat rapidly and actively.
No offence, but you're around 1600. When you get to 1900 or 2000 you'll see that you do need time to think because every candidate move has a certain tree complexity.
I agree that I shouldn't get points if I take too long, but solving a problem in too much time and failing it carries pretty much the same penalty;thi is not right.
It's not the same penalty. A quick wrong wild guess carries a much worse penalty than getting the moves correct but in more than the allotted time.
Do you know if the allowed time changes depending on the average time that people use? The allowed time seems to be a function of the average time. I think the allowed time is twice the average time.
If that is correct, I would imagine that the 1900 problems, which require solving tree complexity, allow for that complexity and give more time to find the solution. What is the longest allowed time you have seen?
Yeah I've switched to another site until chess.com address the issue. The current system is badly flawed and encourages people to guess the moves rather than calculate properly.
You don't have unlimited time to figure out a position when you are playing. Why should you have three weeks to solve a position when you are given the advantage of knowing that a tactic is available? Surely 160 seconds offers more than enough time for getting beyond a mere guess in most situations. These are not usually asking you to figure out the finishing combinations that won the Immortal Game.
I am someone who often runs up against time controls in real games. I like the fact that I have to approach the problems somewhat rapidly and actively.
No offence, but you're around 1600. When you get to 1900 or 2000 you'll see that you do need time to think because every candidate move has a certain tree complexity.
I agree that I shouldn't get points if I take too long, but solving a problem in too much time and failing it carries pretty much the same penalty;thi is not right.