County teams 2011-12

A forum for the Midland Counties Chess Union.
Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7403
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Alex Holowczak » Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:00 am

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:(a) The home team (or designated home team) has choice of equipment, be it digital or analogue clocks
(b) The home team has the right to insist on either an incremental or non-incremental time control if it's using digital clocks.

And we should have acceptable time controls that can be used. E.g. it should be 40/100 + G/20 or 36/90 + G/30 for non-increments in a 4-hour session, and 110 + 10' or 90 + 30' for increments. Then in the 5-hour session, 40/120 + G/30 for non-increments and 40/90 + 30 + 30' or 40/110 + 30 + 10' for increments. So basically, the home team chooses the time control, and notifies the other captain in advance of the game.

I confess to not thinking of raising something like this at the time. Still, something for next year?

I think the problem with this is that 30 second increments actually mean that games can go on for a who hour longer that planned. The 5 hours session could easily have a game lasting over 6 hours. I'm not sure that's appropriate for county matches. 10 second increments may be more acceptable.


I wouldn't disagree with that.

Mick Norris
Posts: 3613
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Mick Norris » Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:54 am

Which is why in 2010 I proposed this was adopted as a template:
http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/increment.htm

As you know, I thought we ought to have a "standard" incremental time control for (roughly) 4 and 5 hour sessions - what was agreed in 2011 was that we could decide anything we like, as long as both captains agreed in advance - which is what I hope will be done

Sean pointed out that the SCCU time control of 35 moves would better be adapted to match the time controls used for non-incremental play

I suggest, therefore, that we agree with the 10 sec per move (from the start presumably, rather than from the first time control, although that could be done too) and agree appropriate rates for both 40 moves (Championship) and 36 moves (other)

Maybe 40/110 mins plus 20 mins plus 10 sec/move from move 1
and 36/80 mins plus 20 mins plus 10 sec/move from move 1
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7403
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Alex Holowczak » Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:15 pm

Mick Norris wrote:Maybe 40/110 mins plus 20 mins plus 10 sec/move from move 1
and 36/80 mins plus 20 mins plus 10 sec/move from move 1


That works out to be 4 hours 40 and 3 hours 40 respectively. So you need to find another 10 minutes in the 110/20 and 80/20 somewhere. So 115/25 and 85/25 would work. 110/30 and 80/30 would work. I prefer to keep the 30 minutes in the second session.

I'm happy that we can agree whatever time control we like in practice, but there needs to be a default one in case captains can't agree!

Mick Norris
Posts: 3613
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Mick Norris » Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:24 pm

If you have a 5 hour session, you are giving each player 150 mins

My suggestion uses 130 mins, leaving 20 mins at 10 sec per move i.e. 120 moves - should be fine

For a 4 hour session, you have 120 mins each

I'm allocating 100 mins, again giving 120 moves to finish

Like most mathematicians, I can't add up, but it seems to be right to me
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Sean Hewitt

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Sean Hewitt » Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:58 pm

I would suggest

40/110 + 30 mins + 10 secs per move from move 1
36/80 + 30 mins + 10 secs per move from move 1

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7403
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Alex Holowczak » Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:47 pm

Mick Norris wrote:If you have a 5 hour session, you are giving each player 150 mins

My suggestion uses 130 mins, leaving 20 mins at 10 sec per move i.e. 120 moves - should be fine

For a 4 hour session, you have 120 mins each

I'm allocating 100 mins, again giving 120 moves to finish

Like most mathematicians, I can't add up, but it seems to be right to me


FIDE has a regulation to say that an incremental game is of the length determined by a 60-move game, not 120-move game. There's absolutely nothing wrong with your proposal; there's no reason why it can't be anything other than 4 hours or 5 hours: So as long as you change "The duration of play in the Championship shall be not less than five hours" and "In the remaining grade restricted tournaments the duration of play shall be not less than four hours", then you're fine.

Mick Norris
Posts: 3613
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Harwood, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Mick Norris » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:03 pm

Alex

I am more concerned with running out of time at the venue than with FIDE (or specifically, that's what I expect to hear from our opponents)

Discussed it briefly at the Manchester Autumn Congress this pm, which is using incremental time controls for the first time, and it was suggested 30 sec increment would be better

I wondered about 40/100 or 36/70 followed by 10 min with 30 sec from the start? That would give a break even of 40 moves after the time control, with the same amount of time as normal to the time control
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7403
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: County teams 2011-12

Postby Alex Holowczak » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:34 pm

Mick Norris wrote:I am more concerned with running out of time at the venue than with FIDE (or specifically, that's what I expect to hear from our opponents)


Sure, I was just making you aware of the necessary rule changes!

Mick Norris wrote:Discussed it briefly at the Manchester Autumn Congress this pm, which is using incremental time controls for the first time, and it was suggested 30 sec increment would be better

I wondered about 40/100 or 36/70 followed by 10 min with 30 sec from the start? That would give a break even of 40 moves after the time control, with the same amount of time as normal to the time control


I agree that a 30-second increment is the ideal increment, but Sean's point about venues closing makes me wonder if that's practical. I don't like using increments shorter than that, because it's non-trivial to know if moves still need to be recorded. I'd be happy to play to your suggested time control, assuming it was practical.


Return to “MCCU”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests