One vote for 45/45.
Live Chess 45|45 Time
Sort:
chesslover1995 wrote:
VERY BAD IDEA.
30 Minutes should be MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME for a person to play a chess game.
If you're playing a 30-Minute chess game and you find yourself running out of time, you probably shouldn't even be playing chess; better to play Tic Tac Toe instead.
Sounds like you have never played a real game of chess in your life.
chesslover1995 wrote:
VERY BAD IDEA.
30 Minutes should be MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME for a person to play a chess game.
If you're playing a 30-Minute chess game and you find yourself running out of time, you probably shouldn't even be playing chess; better to play Tic Tac Toe instead.
What???
If your running out of time it shows your thinking. Many chess games are longer than 30 min - All standard fide ones for a start. Having longer allows you to think about whats going on, especially when you start playing against better players.
chesslover1995 ha scritto:
All you have to do is (1) follow opening principles and (2) stay alert for tactics, and you should already have some idea of what move to make.
So you haven't idea of what chess is
chesslover1995 wrote:
VERY BAD IDEA.
30 Minutes should be MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME for a person to play a chess game.
If you're playing a 30-Minute chess game and you find yourself running out of time, you probably shouldn't even be playing chess; better to play Tic Tac Toe instead.
So I guess Kramnik, Carlsen, Ivanchuck, et.al. should all take up Tic Tac Toe?
They played much longer time controls and I think all ran into time troubles during the tournament.
chesslover1995 wrote:
K4rbon wrote:
chesslover1995 ha scritto:
All you have to do is (1) follow opening principles and (2) stay alert for tactics, and you should already have some idea of what move to make.
So you haven't idea of what chess is
Do you need me to explain the Opening Principles & Tactics to you?
Because if you do, you may want to go back and learn chess basics, before you reply to people and make yourself look foolish.
If you rely smiply on Opening Principles and Tactics, you will never advance beyond the point where your opponents stop hanging pieces.
chesslover1995 wrote:
Rsava wrote:
chesslover1995 wrote:
VERY BAD IDEA.
30 Minutes should be MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME for a person to play a chess game.
If you're playing a 30-Minute chess game and you find yourself running out of time, you probably shouldn't even be playing chess; better to play Tic Tac Toe instead.
So I guess Kramnik, Carlsen, Ivanchuck, et.al. should all take up Tic Tac Toe?
They played much longer time controls and I think all ran into time troubles during the tournament.
@Rsava: If you're taking longer than 30 minutes to play ONE chess game, you're a slowpoke and you should work on improving your time management skills. Because let's not forget, chess is a three-dimensional game (flat board = 2 dimensions; and time on the clock = 3rd dimension).
So I again state,
"So I guess Kramnik, Carlsen, Ivanchuck, et.al. should all take up Tic Tac Toe?
They played much longer time controls and I think all ran into time troubles during the tournament."
By your reckoning, they are all slowpokes and they need to work on their time management skills.
You are either trolling or .... you are trolling.
Chesslover1995, FIDE OTB tournament chess is played with long time controls of hours and hours, and many grandmasters call the slow chess "Real Chess" as it is not possible to apply full chess strategy to every move in a 30 minute or slower game. It is this principle that many fans of slow chess would like to see slower time controls added to the live chess section.
I guess when you have nothing to think about, 30 minutes might seem like enough. But chess isn't just about avoiding tactics.
lol do you know OTB?
Haesthlin wrote:
... as it is not possible to apply full chess strategy to every move in a 30 minute or slower game.
+1, simple way of explaining this entire thread.
chesslover1995 wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
I guess when you have nothing to think about, 30 minutes might seem like enough. But chess isn't just about avoiding tactics.
Before you reply to people, you should probably read their earlier posts first. I mentioned quite a number of different concepts (not just tactics) that are essential to chess. Make sure you read earlier comments before making yourself look foolish.
I would suggest that when someone who doesn't have a single rating above 1200 (for any time control) starts telling people they don't know how to play chess well, it is them that look foolish.
Stats about chesslover1995:
Best win bullet: 1046
Best win blitz: 1125
Best win standard: 964
Your just not at the level where time matters so much.
Could we all just please save this thread for feedback regarding my original statement of adding slower time controls to live chess with quick positive comments. I am delighted to see all the support for this suggestion but if the staff just sees us arguing and namecalling they will mostlikely just disregard this forum thread completely. :*(
chesslover1995 wrote:
your goal is simply to play the best chess that you can *in the given time on the clock*
So whats your issue with increasing the time on the clock. By your own logic more time is better chess.
EDIT: Sorry Haesthlin, I'll stop talking now. :)
chesslover, you are wrong, your goal in a chess game IS to mentally process each and every single possible candidate. Your style of play is called "hope chess" which is why you are rated so low.
A few more standard time controls in the drop down would really help. 20/20 or 30/30 would be great in my opinion.
Adding them to the drop down means they will be used more. Most players just use the standard time controls in the dropdown, so it can be hard to get a game if you use a custom time control.
Chess.com staff: why not add a poll to the site, where people can vote on two slow time controls to add to the dropdown? That would make it democratic and ought to make sure that what gets added is what will get used.
You have my vote as well!