IM John Donaldson of San Francisco won the Open with 5 points from 6 after Curt Collyer of Spokane forced a draw by repetition shortly after the parties made the first time control in round 6.
For most of the years I’ve played tournament chess there has been a ‘time control’ to make. Upon arriving at the ‘time control’ the players would receive additional time. Many of the games would end right there because who wants to sit behind an army that has been decimated? That is not the case today. No one resigns; playing out piece down, and more, positions in hope of ‘winning’ on time; a shallow victory, indeed.
We need to go back to having a time control at move 40, especially in Senior events. I believe it is bad for chess to have so called ‘sudden death’ time controls. The fact that a 5-second delay is used confirms my contention. I rest my case.
Michael Bacon
I don’t know what tournament you’re referring to (“The Open” isn’t very definitive) but I hope that the problem you describe will be taken care of in my New England Open over Labor Day weekend. It’ll have a 30 second increment, so unless a player falls asleep, he should be able to avoid losing on time.
The answer is increment time controls. it brings back the multiple time control advantage, while eliminating some of the disadvantages.
I have used it in several events, it is accepted very well, and does exactly what you desire. It actually shortens many games for the very reasons you point out.
G/90 inc/30 is very playable (game 90 minutes, 30 seconds added time per move)
To put it in “traditional” time control format it is the same as 1/90min; 1/30sec, … and rather than breaking the “first” control at a specified and arbitrary number (like 40 moves) and then giving a lump sum amount of time (like another 30 minutes) it gives a small, but consistent amount of added time each and every move. With an increment capable digital clock the resetting is automatic.
“Try it, you like it!”
An extra 30 seconds per move at 40 moves adds 20 minutes per side, so an average game would last about 3.5 hours. Of course, the maximum time (if you get an 80+ move game) is rather longer, and that’s what counts when planning the round times.
Which is my dilemma. I assumed the longest game of the round to be about 60 moves which adds 30 minutes to each player’s clock. Add a 30 minute buffer between rounds, and there’s my 4.5 hour estimate.
I don’t have adjournment envelopes. I use a reliable back up system for the games when I need to adjourn (US Am West or lighting strikes) them. Any spare envelopes would be greatly appreciated though!
I tried this at the New England Masters in 2007. Most games finished after about 3½-4 hours but one particular game went on for nearly 5½ hours. Given that I had only scheduled 6 hours between rounds it was pushing it a little close.
After speaking to some of my target player base (FIDE 2200 and above), they preferred tournaments with 2 time controls as the continual living off a 30 second increment for possibly 2 or more hours, without any bathroom breaks, etc. was not looked upon favorably. At least with 2 time controls, e.g. 40/2, SD/30 as I did in 2008, they could get a little break after 40 moves to see them through to the end of the game.
I use a reliable back up system for the games when I need to adjourn (US Am West or lighting strikes) them. Any spare envelopes would be greatly appreciated though!