FIDE have just announced a series of what one assumes will now be standard time controls for world events, agreed at a Presidential Board meeting in Chengdu. Here's the list if you want to take a look http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... vents.html
The time controls all have increments so trying to "flag" someone will now be really difficult. Don't think too many people will be crying over that.
There is a very interesting discussion on whether increments are a good thing or a bad thing on the Quality Chess Blog http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/blog/3750#comment-255254
Personally I think increments are a good thing if for no other reason then it stops players breaking the clocks by bashing them when they are in time trouble.
FIDE Time Controls
-
- Posts: 21315
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: FIDE Time Controls
Looking down the list, it's what I thought were already the time controls. Perhaps the only difference is that they have dropped the version where the increment starts at move 61. If so, they are out of line with the proposed St Louis, London, Norway circuit which intends to retain the late increment, but starting at move 41. Apart from not keeping score, which shouldn't be a problem when using sensory boards, having a deferred increment retains the drama of time scrambles without getting into Appendix G territory.Chris Rice wrote:FIDE have just announced a series of what one assumes will now be standard time controls for world events, agreed at a Presidential Board meeting in Chengdu.
-
- Posts: 4549
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: FIDE Time Controls
It is the new 3 tournament initiative that is out of step. Now all other important events have an increment from move 1.
The advantage of that is primarily you get better chess played. This is because players manage their time better. Only where chess is a spectator sport is there the advantage of seeing people's hands lunging out. Other than that, the spectators are online, on chessbase or reading.
Another reason for not using an increment is Kasparov's opinion that repeating moves once, to gain more time, is aesthetically displeasing.
When I wrote the rules for the 1997 World Knockout Championship, I had no idea that, once adopted worldwide, it would lead to a rise in quality of chess. I just couldn't stand the thought of the World Championship being decided by the arbiter's quickplay finish decision. Even if the arbiter had been me.
The advantage of that is primarily you get better chess played. This is because players manage their time better. Only where chess is a spectator sport is there the advantage of seeing people's hands lunging out. Other than that, the spectators are online, on chessbase or reading.
Another reason for not using an increment is Kasparov's opinion that repeating moves once, to gain more time, is aesthetically displeasing.
When I wrote the rules for the 1997 World Knockout Championship, I had no idea that, once adopted worldwide, it would lead to a rise in quality of chess. I just couldn't stand the thought of the World Championship being decided by the arbiter's quickplay finish decision. Even if the arbiter had been me.
-
- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm
Re: FIDE Time Controls
Hear! Hear!Stewart Reuben wrote:I just couldn't stand the thought of the World Championship being decided by the arbiter's quickplay finish decision. Even if the arbiter had been me.
Even if (especially if!) it is the local club championship and not the World Championship.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.