Evening leagues -rates of play

[J T Melsom]

The Bucks League abolished quickplay finishes last season and moved to all moves in ninety minutes. It directed clubs to ensure that they could support play with increments in subsequent seasons and buy appropriate clocks. The AGM will make a decision this week but given last year's decision required the casting vote of the Chair I'm not sure it will be straightforward. I suspect there will be a strong lobby for 80 plus 10 seconds, as this is used in an adjoining county. Has this become the preferred setting for three hour sessions or are there reasonable alternatives? The most obvious advantage is presumably that any games that are significantly longer than the sixty moves are not prolonged unduly by the modest increment.

[Roger de Coverly]

The Bucks League abolished quickplay finishes last season and moved to all moves in ninety minutes.

I rather think it abolished intermediate time controls. All the moves in ninety minutes is just as much a quickplay finish as something in 75 plus 15 minutes and still subject to "unable" claims, which despite being around for more than twenty years are stll poorly understood as to when you can make the claim and what happens when you do.

[J T Melsom]

I suspect 'quickplay finish' means different things to different people. I also suspect that 'unable claims' are not understood because many players play a relatively small number of games and have either not had the rules explained to them with sufficient clarity or do not encounter them often enough in practice to adequately apply those rules. Changing rates of play may seem a minor inconvenience to those who are used to playing outside the local club context, but those people may actually be in a minority so some sensitivity is needed. An assumption that it isn't a difficult adjustment because more active players have adjusted may be an unhelpful attitude.

[Joey Stewart]

The good thing about increments is that they actively prevent a lot disputes from ever happening, since the majority of disputes happen in extreme time trouble having even a 10 second one should be more then enough for the game to trundle along to it's natural conclusion. It also seems to help keep the adjournment die hards on side as they don't feel they are being forced into games that they might get flagged in.

[Angus French]

The London Chess League has:
- a playing session of 3hrs 20 minutes at its two central and shared venues and maybe of 3hrs at other venues
- games of 75 minutes start time + a 15 second increment after each move
- if a game is still in play when time is called it's up to the opposing captains to agree a result or submit an adjudication claim. I forget the stats but very few games aren't completed and of those still in progress nearly all are likely to have 6 (7?) or fewer pieces remaining on the board so a result with best play can be determined by consulting tablebases.

[NickFaulks]

There is a vital question here which is often left unaddressed. If you are playing a three hour session and using increments, what precisely happens on the stroke of three hours? Does the match controller call time, with ongoing games adjudicated, or is there a bit of leeway to give them a chance to finish? If you have just stopped using adjournments, then probably there could be some leeway because you no longer need to allow time for sealing moves, etc.

With no leeway, it should be understood that 80 + 10 envisages adjudication after as few as 60 moves.

[Roger de Coverly]

The good thing about increments is that they actively prevent a lot disputes from ever happening, since the majority of disputes happen in extreme time trouble having even a 10 second one should be more then enough for the game to trundle along to it's natural conclusion.

Certainly, but what move rates do leagues actually use? Adam Raoof uses 60 30 for the three hour sessions at his Congresses, but for league play, my assumption would be that longer increments increase the risks of games going past actual or notional closing times of evening venues.

[Roger de Coverly]

There is a vital question here which is often left unaddressed. If you are playing a three hour session and using increments, what precisely happens on the stroke of three hours?

Usually nothing, unless the venue has strict closure protocols. In those circumstances either or both of an earlier start or a shorter session are required.

[NickFaulks]

The London Chess League has:
- a playing session of 3hrs 20 minutes at its two central and shared venues and maybe of 3hrs at other venues
- games of 75 minutes start time + a 15 second increment after each move
- if a game is still in play when time is called it's up to the opposing captains to agree a result or submit an adjudication claim. I forget the stats but very few games aren't completed and of those still in progress nearly all are likely to have 6 (7?) or fewer pieces remaining on the board so a result with best play can be determined by consulting tablebases.

The LL rules allow 100 moves, which is good enough for me. That still might alter the assessment of R+B v R, even if defending against Keith.

[NickFaulks]

Usually nothing, unless the venue has strict closure protocols. In those circumstances either or both of an earlier start or a shorter session are required.

Right, but at most venues games will have to be stopped at some point, so who decides? Bear in mind that usually one player will be trying to win a position which is drawn with best play, or the other trying to defend a position which is lost with best play. These ambitions and assessments may well be oscillating minute by minute.

[Mick Norris]

The Bucks League abolished quickplay finishes last season and moved to all moves in ninety minutes. It directed clubs to ensure that they could support play with increments in subsequent seasons and buy appropriate clocks. The AGM will make a decision this week but given last year's decision required the casting vote of the Chair I'm not sure it will be straightforward. I suspect there will be a strong lobby for 80 plus 10 seconds, as this is used in an adjoining county. Has this become the preferred setting for three hour sessions or are there reasonable alternatives? The most obvious advantage is presumably that any games that are significantly longer than the sixty moves are not prolonged unduly by the modest increment.

In Manchester we have settled on a 15 second increment

It seems that 60 + 15 is generally thought too fast but some have concerns about 80 + 15 overrunning

[Joey Stewart]

I tend to think that any increment which allows a move to be completed with a little bit of extra left over is plenty . 30 seconds seems a bit gratuitous for evening leagues and definitely runs the risk of overrunning a session, anyone who feels they 'need' increments that long to survive time scrambles are likely the sort of player who would manage to lose a game on time irrespective of how much they had on the clock.

[David Williams]

Concerns always seem to be about game over-running, but I think there is another advantage of 80 + 10 over, say, 60 + 30. (Based on the assumption that limits are being selected on the basis that a 60 move game will take three hours.)

Without increments, there seem to be quite a lot of players that will habitually use 85 of their 90 minutes on the first 30 moves or so. By that stage most games are either over, or virtually so. But at 60 + 30 you only have 75 minutes for the first 30 moves. In practical terms large increments mean a significant reduction in time, and many games taking half an hour less than they used to, when the time constraints in evening leagues were already an issue.

[Roger de Coverly]

Right, but at most venues games will have to be stopped at some point, so who decides?

Berks League has been using 80 10 for several years and it's never happened. In practice when you start around 7:30pm, almost every game is over by 10:30 pm. When there's a bar, shutting at 11 pm plus drinking up time, that's more than adequate.

[Joey Stewart]

Roger makes a good point, it would take a particularly belligerent venue to be kicking players out right on the stroke of closing time, and given how much pubs and social clubs are struggling right now they really need all the attendance they can get.