Micah, given how poorly players are at setting their clocks, I would suggest the following. However, you may wish to bust it up, so it doesn’t become too overwhelming:
Is 3 more urgent than 1 or 4? I’m uncertain.
Thanks Kevin.
Also, thanks for posting the link to my document in the information about the US Senior and US Junior Opens!
Change 4. to 5. and add:
4. Double time control, increment
CCA is starting to use this one a lot.
By the way, has anybody noticed that the short Chronos can do increment and delay at the same time? For instance, increment in the first control, delay in the second. Or better yet, a 30-second increment and a 5-second delay in a single control. With this latter one, at each move it first gives you a 5-second delay countdown, then starts the main time, adding 30 seconds at the end of the move.
Bill Smythe
I think the next version is supposed to also have a random number generator for the amount of increment and delay for each move.
I have been asked run events with a large inc. Does it concern anyone that the game could go on forever ??
How large is large? Even 30 seconds increment could lead to a game that lasts a long time. I’ve seen some 90 second increment events.
I was at a national scholastic once where there was a chess set and running clock in a corner of the TD room. One of the TDs told me that he and another TD were playing a rated game at a time control of 1 move in 1 hour.
At the North American Youth the time control was G/90;+30 and one game finished after 4 3/4 hours with time still on the clock.
If it had been G/60;+60 instead of G/90;+30 then the players would probably have used it all and the game would have exceeded 5 1/2 hours.
That was in the under 14 years old section with sub-2000 ratings. High Schoolers and Adults might take longer.
There are some chess players who are walking examples of Parkinson’s law: Work expands so as to consume all of the time available for its completion.
These players will use nearly all of the time on their clock in many of their games, regardless of the time control.
well, I have believe A players and above can come up with a decent move in 30 secs. I suppose CCA is trying to mirror FIDE.
If you want to rate events through FIDE then you must use FIDE rules and regulations.
Adjournment might be the solution to that problem.
Adjournments pose their own problems, and IMHO should be avoided if at all possible.
I agree with scottrparker.
If the resultant delay in the schedule is minor enough to not need an adjournment then “going on forever” was not an issue in the first place. If you have G/60;+60 with rounds five hours apart and you get a marathon 150-move game using virtually all the time for a seven hour game (not the last game of the day) then you either adjourn (might be a solution) or you delay the next round by more than two hours (your players might be okay with that). The same game with G/90;+30 would top out at five and a half hours and you might be okay with delaying a round by 45 minutes.
If as an organizer you set up a silly time control like G/60;+60 for a tournament with more than one round in a day, then you deserve whatever evil happens to you.
well, I’m playing in the National Chess Congress, hopefully. T/c is 40/80 I 30 g/30 I 30. i see that going on forever. should go 40/100 d10 and g/60 d10
The increment time control will not go on forever. There have been huge tournaments that have used a 30 second increment just fine.
The stated T/C allows for 140 minutes (max) for each player to get to 60 moves. That’s a total of 4:40. The first and second rounds of the day are at least 6 hours apart (6:15 on the first two days). It would take 120 moves with each player using all their time to even get to 5:40. Possibly, but very unlikely and even that wouldn’t kill the schedule. (The game would probably have to be entered for pairing purposes before being done). Note that your preferred time control is 170 (max) for each player to get to 60 moves. That’s a total of 5:40 just to get to 60 (and note that with d/10 rather than +30, it’s much more likely for players to be using up nearly all their time). There’s no way that could be run (in a serious tournament) at 6 hours (or even 6:15) between rounds.
Players don’t like adjournments. TD’s don’t like adjournments. Adjournments are sometimes necessary. However, even before you actually would need to adjourn a game, you will probably need to make the next round pairings. Sometimes simply letting the players know that you are going to pair them as (most likely) a win-draw may cause one player or the other to give up a fruitless effort to squeeze an extra half point out of a position. (Gee…I can keep beating my head against the wall, end up having no rest before the next round and get paired a 1/2 point higher anyway. Maybe agreeing to a draw/resigning is a better option).
An adjournment allows the game to be corrupted by letting the likes of Stockfish and Komodo get involved in the play, and should be avoided like the plague. It is really only necessary if you have a poorly designed schedule. You’re almost certainly using increment, probably a long increment like 30 seconds, and you’re trying to fit in more than one round in a day. Increment wasn’t designed for a schedule like that.