I think there are many reasons to believe we will get enough players for the five sections
Except that if I finish my game at 12:00 and have a 1:00 round, I have an hour where I can grab lunch. If I have a 12:15 round that ends up not starting until 1:00 (for whatever reason) I’m stuck in the tournament hall.
Alex Relyea
Those of us who aren’t kids like to know we will have at least an hour after we play a four hour plus game. Mr. Smith may think that no one wants to have rest in between rounds, but the players don’t necessarily look at it that way.
As can be seen from my comments above, this is not true
I think there’s a very good reason that your tournaments don’t even draw 30 players.
Your words say one thing. Your tournament structure tells another story.
The main tournament I run, the Quad 45, isn’t expected to draw 30 players at the moment.
I took over running the Quad tournament a little over two years ago and took it from a tournament that virtually got nobody into a tournament that is averaging almost 20 players.
As I pointed out above, what you’re doing works well enough for a quad. I’m less sold on it for a Swiss. You’ve gathered the opinions you wanted, and you are firmly decided on your format. Let us know how it goes.
Not that you’re going to care, but yes, you are experimenting with a too-tight schedule. When CCA went to d/10, they also reduced the base times. Standard practice is to allow (at least) 50-60 minutes after a 60 move full time game would complete. There are many reasons for that. Your schedule allows 30 and because you’re using d/15, you’re even more likely to have a problem with a long-running game.
Yes, any tournament can be thrown off by a 100 move marathon. Those, however, are extremely rare, and at d/5 still at least would get done in time to pair the next round. 60 move games aren’t that uncommon which is why it’s the (world-wide) norm for tournament scheduling. I don’t think anyone is saying that you should spread the schedule out even more—five hours round to round is standard for a roughly four hour session. Just cut the base time down to 110 from 120 and your tournament schedule is back on something approaching the standard.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I would vastly prefer a G/90;+30 to either a G/120;d10 or G/120;d15. I also think it would take about the same time. Is there a reason you’re opposed to increment time?
Alex Relyea
In the US Open I had three games out of seven go 60 moves. 60 moves is quite common. Tom is right. Make it 110 minutes base and you’re probably fine. At 40 moves base, d/15 is cruel to the players. You can practically count on two or three long games a round. That’s not a theoretical possibility.
I’m not sure what you mean by “At 40 moves base, d/15 is cruel to the players.”
I’m sure you don’t. You either haven’t listened to anything else I or others have said in this thread about reasonable meal breaks, you don’t understand it or you don’t care. I will charitably assume it’s the second option because that’s the choice that puts you in the most favorable light. 260 minutes for a 40 move game leaves only a 40 minute lunch break, and a 60 move game takes another 10 minutes. That’s not enough, even if there is food available on site ( a condition I don’t recall you indicating exists). Granted not all moves will use a 15 second delay, but that only mitigates the situation slightly. If you do not comprehend why those conditions are inhumane, I don’t want anything to do with your long tournaments. Quads are a different animal, but for long tournaments your plan is a bad one. Change it to 110 minutes and it’s passable.
Apparently, I need to be a bit more explicit. People who play $40 EF’s and are playing for (if you’re lucky) $1000+ prize funds expect something more than “TD will adjust sections as required and will adjust schedule if necessary”. If you want to continue to treat a fairly serious tournament as if it’s club quads, don’t be surprised if your attendance is spotty.
I think 40 minutes off (at the very least) in-between 4-hour games is adequate. I’ve played under much worse conditions. Changing it to 110 minutes would defeat one of the main purposes of why we expanded the time control from G/120;d10 to G/120;d15 which was to give players a few more minutes for the game overall.
I know you think that. You’ve made that quite clear even though a number of us have told you otherwise. Players who have to scramble for food and consume it without getting indigestion may disagree, especially if there is no food on site. Those of us who don’t walk fast would hate this. Don’t expect many seniors! But I’ve made my point and as usual you have rejected it. The players will vote with their wallets. Good luck!
Good luck in your quest to become a SrTD so that you can become an NA and FIDE-rate the events you run.
I would hate to have players leave one of my tournaments saying “Well, those weren’t the worst conditions I’ve ever played under.” FWIW, as I believe I’ve mentioned before here, the worst conditions I’ve ever directed under included a sorority initiation next door to the tournament hall. I was actually moved from the space I (thought I) had rented. The sisters sang the same **** song over and over again.
Alex Relyea
A game that goes Game 120, d15 will use up as much energy as a 15 round boxing match. This is not my opinion but comes from studies by the Russians on the how much energy their players use in competition. At the end of a 4.5 hour game, the player is washed out. He is tired, a little dehydrated, and needs food that will not get processed by his body for at least an hour. This is the reason that in major Swisses there is an hour or more break between rounds. It is not for the convenience of the TD or arbiter.
If you are going to run a tournament with a time control of Game 120, d15, then you can only run two rounds a day for practical purposes. Rounds at 10 am and 4 pm are adequate to the purpose. I have run similar tournaments and the players appreciated the extra time to rest and go out to eat. It improved attendance. The relaxed atmosphere made the event seem like an international tournament. It was possible to put pairings up early so that players could even do a little preparation. The TD was able to go out to eat, too, as he did not have to oversee any extremely long games. Player comments were complimentary. In a world where the trend is to faster time controls and jamming 4 or 5 games into a day, the two day tournament with good conditions is becoming a rarity.
My suggestion is that if you run a multiple section tournament with Game 120, d15, that you run it as a 4 round event with rounds at 10 - 4 each day. This would be compliant under FIDE rules for tournaments as well as the best practices that many US organizers use for their major events. You are likely to get 20 players or less per section, based on your previous comments and tournament data. People will give up two days of their busy lives to play in a good tournament with ideal conditions.
Hey, that’s how I schedule my 40/90, SD/30;+30 tournaments. I have not a single time had a problem with a round running over, either.
Alex Relyea