Add a classical rating category

Yes, this has become mandatory since they've put 10 min time control in the rapid category.

Also, introducing a default 30|30 time control would be great for us that like to play longer games, since, as nklristic pointed out, 45|45 usually lasts longer than 60 mins.

Yeah, 30 minutes with increment would be good idea. It would be  probably nice for those who already plays 30 minute games and want something a bit longer but don't really want to go for 45|45 or 1 hour per side. 

Though 30|30 is practically equal in duration to 60|0 for games that reach endgame stage, so perhaps 30|20 is a bit more realistic or something like that.

The calculations for the duration are done with the assumption that an average chess game lasts for 40 moves. That would make 30|30 last 50 mins.

In principle, a longer standard time control and classical rating would be great but I have some reservations about pairing time.

I stopped playing chess here a few weeks ago because at 2000+, 15|10 pairing was often taking ages. I only currently use the website for puzzles and puzzle rush which are no enough to make me want to renew.

Up to say 1 400 - 1 500 you can get a game in up to 2 minutes almost every time (60|0 or 45|45). There are some 1 600+ rated people who play long games, but it is indeed a bit difficult for me to find someone higher rated than me. I've seen and played some 2000+ rated people in 30 minute pool instead of stubbornly waiting for a long game.

But, all that being said, if they include classical rating at least some people will want to have rating in that time control. Some of them will probably like it once they start playing and there is some chance that this pool will be better. At this time, if you are not 100% for longer games, you can play 10 minute games (which are by far most popular, at least by the statistics a few years ago) and you will get the same rating as if you are playing 45|45.

I don't expect a boom though, but I believe things would get somewhat better with inclusion of classical rating.

Yeah thank you all! Hope we soon see it

     I only use chess.com for the opening book and analysis--playing speed games with a few friends for fun is ok, but you just can't play a good game in 30 minutes or less. Last night I played otb at the local chess club and even with game/90+30 we were both in time trouble by move 50.

     The only problem I see with playing longer games online is that it would be too easy to cheat--using opening books, calculating moves on a physical board, etc. Unfortunately there are people so obsessed with winning and ratings that they would do such things.

     The bottom line is that longer games=better play as you have time to analyze and calculate. All those famous GM games we study had time controls like 40 moves in 2 1/2 hours.

People can easily cheat in shorter games as well. But statistically, it doesn't happen often enough to spoil the fun. I've played a bit over 400 games in a year and half (almost all of them in longer time control like 60|0) since I opened the account. I would say that roughly 15 of the opponents have been banned. It can be annoying, but it certainly doesn't spoil it for me enough to stop playing. 

I have no idea. But the decision was just made in the past week or so. A new rating category touches a lot of areas, so it may be a while.

I see. Thank you for the answer.

Thank you Martin for the info, helpful as always.

That is great! It's about time for the classical mode to make its way here. Anything over 15 minutes should be considered classical. 

This is great news, I can't wait for the classical category, you have no idea how much value this is going to add for many regular players who are switching to other platforms for classical games. Thank you! Hope it happens sooner than later.

Chess.com! Is it that hard to add?

yes would like a classical time control 

It is not fair or logic to me that people who play 10+0 are mixed in the same rating category with the others who play 30 + 0 or slower.

Martin said they were working on it almost 11 months ago, but as they say, good things come to those who wait.

I'm curious about this too. Were they working on it (as Martin said) but then gave up? Are they still working on it and somehow can't figure it out? Did they succeed but keep it secret? It would be nice to have an update.