Changing the registered time control

[Giulio Simeone]

Sometimes it happens that certain tournaments are registered on the FIDE website with a certain time control, and then are played with another time control, usually worse. For example, the tournament that was just played in Cortina d'Ampezzo, in Northern Italy, was registered with the 90 x 40 + 30 + 30 time control

http://ratings.fide.com/tournament_deta ... vent=66976

and then was played with the 90 + 30 time control. I have seen several other tournaments that had their time control changed. Is that allowed by the FIDE rules? Are there any penalties for the organizers who change the time?

[Alex Holowczak]

Sometimes it happens that certain tournaments are registered on the FIDE website with a certain time control, and then are played with another time control, usually worse. For example, the tournament that was just played in Cortina d'Ampezzo, in Northern Italy, was registered with the 90 x 40 + 30 + 30 time control

http://ratings.fide.com/tournament_deta ... vent=66976

and then was played with the 90 + 30 time control. I have seen several other tournaments that had their time control changed. Is that allowed by the FIDE rules? Are there any penalties for the organizers who change the time?

The World University Championship of 2010 changed the time control at the last minute from 40/90 + 15 + 30' to 90 + 30', and didn't tell anyone. The reason for this was that 90 + 30' was going to lose its norm status, but FIDE changed its mind. I wasn't told about this by the organisers, which was a bit remiss, but I didn't mind the actual change in time control, because it made the event more appealing for those in attendance.

I don't know the answer to your question because it has never come up in my experience. In England, tournaments tend to run at the advertised time control. The only exception is an 8-player/team Swiss over 6 rounds, which became a 7-round APA by mutual agreement between all of the teams involved. The reason I make this point is that I note you weren't playing in the event according to the crosstable. Do you know whether or not the players in the event were made aware of this change? Do you know whether or not the information published on the rating file is simply a typo, and the tournament website (or the entry form) advertises 90 + 30'?

I would imagine FIDE will be relatively disinterested, given it wasn't a norm event, and it looks like quite a small event generally. The penalty might be a slapped wrist, I suppose.

[Roger de Coverly]

Do you know whether or not the information published on the rating file is simply a typo, and the tournament website (or the entry form) advertises 90 + 30'?

The tournament website advertises it as 90 + 30' , which is as you might expect, seeing as it's a two rounds a day event. Participants would expect the move rate advertised on the website presumably.

[LawrenceCooper]

Any organiser changing the time limit may run the risk of FIDE refusing to rate the event or being fined or both if their threats for registering events less than thirty days before they start are anything to go by.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Sometimes it happens that certain tournaments are registered on the FIDE website with a certain time control, and then are played with another time control, usually worse. For example, the tournament that was just played in Cortina d'Ampezzo, in Northern Italy, was registered with the 90 x 40 + 30 + 30 time control

http://ratings.fide.com/tournament_deta ... vent=66976

and then was played with the 90 + 30 time control. I have seen several other tournaments that had their time control changed. Is that allowed by the FIDE rules? Are there any penalties for the organizers who change the time?

It's probably something you should check with the Federazione Scacchistica Italiana. They are supposed to be the gatekeeper for FIDE related events, you'd probably have to complain through them if a FIDE rule has been broken at a tournament in Italy. The FSI might have a policy in place above and beyond FIDE guidelines. Talk to Maurizio Mascheroni at the FSI office, he should be able to advise what can be done to complain.

[Giulio Simeone]

Actually, as Roger has discovered, the tournament website advertised the 90 + 30 time control. It sounds strange, though, that the FIDE website displays the 90 x 40 + 30 + 30 because of a typo, in my opinion is more probable that the organizers had originally set this time control and then have changed their mind. It was not properly a two round a day event, only the second and the third round were played in the same day, and then a slower time rate may have resulted only, at worst, in a very limited number of players having to eat quickly.

In my opinion it's a real shame that, by now, the majority of the European tournaments are played with the 90 + 30 time rate. The quality of the games gets a lot worse, in particular many endgames are played almost randomly: moreover, in this way it is much harder for players to take a break during the game, it is as if soccer games were played without the halftime interval.

According to my experience, the large majority of the over 2000 players are likely to use nearly all the time they are given: so in my opinion often organizers set the 90 + 30 time rate against the majority's will, and they often do it for questionable reasons.

Thanks for the suggestion Paolo!!

[Sean Hewitt]

According to my experience, the large majority of the over 2000 players are likely to use nearly all the time they are given

Agreed.

...organizers set the 90 + 30 time rate against the majority's will, and they often do it for questionable reasons.

I can only speak for myself here. We run G90'+30" because that's what the majority of our players want. Most players are amateur and so want 2 games per day to minimise time off work and/or cost.

We ran one event with 40/90' +30' +30" and players complained the days were too long so we switched back to G90'+30". If I though for one second that most players wanted 40/90' +30' +30" or even 1 game per day they are the tournaments I would run.

[Stewart Reuben]

The FIDE Rating Reglations require solely that the minimum rates of play ar used. Where at least one player is 2200 or higher that is
a thinking tim of 2 hours based on a 60 move game.
The title regulations are more complex and quite specific. These are to change from 1 July 2013 and will be much simplified. Basically, without an increment of 30 seconds or more - 150 minutes thinking time. With an increment of 30 seconds or more 120 minutes thinking time.

Sean's clientele, similar to the USA, prefer 2 rounds per day. But for the very biggest events, such as Hastings, the British, London Chess Classic Festival, Capelle le Grand or the Olympiad people prefer one round per day. The events under the ECF umbrella offer a mix of events for the customers. From July next year, Sean might experiment with 40 moves in 70 minutes, all in 30, add on 30 seconds cumulatively from the first - or some variation on that rate. Giulio might be able to persuade some Italian organiser to try such a variation.

Even organisers sometimEs make errors! The entry form for the British once gave the finishing dates a year before they started. I never noticed until this was pointed out to me from Singapore. Nobody else commented.
Where the the rules for events are incorrectly stated, this leads the customers not to have confidence in the skills of the organiser. But this usually has little to do with FIDE.

[Richard Bates]

The FIDE Rating Reglations require solely that the minimum rates of play ar used. Where at least one player is 2200 or higher that is
a thinking tim of 2 hours based on a 60 move game.
The title regulations are more complex and quite specific. These are to change from 1 July 2013 and will be much simplified. Basically, without an increment of 30 seconds or more - 150 minutes thinking time. With an increment of 30 seconds or more 120 minutes thinking time.

Sean's clientele, similar to the USA, prefer 2 rounds per day. But for the very biggest events, such as Hastings, the British, London Chess Classic Festival, Capelle le Grand or the Olympiad people prefer one round per day. The events under the ECF umbrella offer a mix of events for the customers. From July next year, Sean might experiment with 40 moves in 70 minutes, all in 30, add on 30 seconds cumulatively from the first - or some variation on that rate. Giulio might be able to persuade some Italian organiser to try such a variation.

Sounds like a seriously backward step to me. You said earlier that the previous regulations were too confusing for organisers. How difficult can it be? - six time controls, got to use one of them! How about giving some thought to the players? The previous regulations were well motivated. The fact is that the time control can seriously affect the way that a player approaches the game. The one used in e2e4 tournaments is completely different to those used at the 4NCL or Hastings, and requires a completely different approach from the players. I don't play in the former because i think the approach has to be akin to rapidplay (perhaps i should change my stance seeing as i appear to be a bit better at that these days...). But at least they know what to expect. Giving a free for all for organisers makes the whole thing impossible since they can effectively do what they want, and opens the prospect of players having to "learn" new time controls every time they turn up.

As for your "experimental" time control - are there any limits beyond those stated? Would, say, 40 moves in 40 minutes, all in 50 +30secs a move be now legal?

[Stewart Reuben]

Until 2009 the permissible rates of play were the same as is now going to apply from 1 July 2013. Presumably Richard you had no difficulty playing in the first 9 years of this century?
What I think is perfectly clear is often not to various organisers.
I am by no means convinced we know what the 'best' rates of play are. Have enough different rates really been tried so we can come to a definitive conclusion? The late Bob Wade and I chose an add-on of 30 seconds in 1994 with no experience. In 1997 I unilaterally chose 40/100, 20/50, all in 15 + 30 seconds per move for the World Championship Knockout. I have been horrified that everybody just blindly uses 30 seconds cumulatively. It is supposed to be a minimum. Fischer first proposed 1 minute. That has only been used in Austalia and Britain. In the US they use 5 seconds in delay mode. Are they wrong? I don't know and I am one of the few mmbers of the Qualification Commission to have played in that way - 5 games.
The rate being used in the Grand Prix, part of the World Championship cycle, is not one of the 6 permitted rates. Most leading players now prefer 30 seconds cumulatively from the first move. Instead they are playing 40/2 hours, 20/1 hour, all in 15 add on 30 seconds per move cumulatively after 60 moves.

Of course the rate used in e2e4 events is faster than Hastings, the 4NCL, Gibraltar, or the British. That is 2 rounds per day and the others are one.

[Richard Bates]

Until 2009 the permissible rates of play were the same as is now going to apply from 1 July 2013. Presumably Richard you had no difficulty playing in the first 9 years of this century?

I'm hardly a good test case because i play relatively very little FIDE rated chess, especially in the first 9 years of this century, and almost all of that would be one round a day, and all in this country. My preferred time control for 2 rounds a day is 40 in 1hr with 1hr to completion. It would be interesting to know the opinions of the various "players representatives" about the changes, since I think they were one of the main driving forces behind restricting the time controls in 2009. Presumably they must have had genuine concerns about a plethora of 'experimental' time controls that were emerging.

Is 40 moves in 40 minutes, 50 minutes to completion, with 30secs added from move 1, now a legal time control?

[Alex Holowczak]

Is 40 moves in 40 minutes, 50 minutes to completion, with 30secs added from move 1, now a legal time control?

If yes, then 40 moves in 1 minute, 89 minutes to completion, with 30 seconds per move from move 1, would presumably be a time control for norm events too. (There's nothing stopping you running a FIDE-rated event with that time control even before July 2013.)

[Adam Raoof]

Not completely off topic, how did you find the time control this weekend Richard? (4NCl rapidplay) I found that playing 10 minutes each plus 10 seconds a move, though technically rapidplay, felt a lot more like blitz chess. I enjoyed the event though!

[Richard Bates]

Not completely off topic, how did you find the time control this weekend Richard? (4NCl rapidplay) I found that playing 10 minutes each plus 10 seconds a move, though technically rapidplay, felt a lot more like blitz chess. I enjoyed the event though!

I think it really needs at least an extra 5 minutes on the start. From a personal perspective i'm a massive fan of increments though. 5 seconds is enough though, so there could be more thinking time appropriate to what you would expect for a rapidplay game. 10 second increment also makes it far too easy for people to build up/waste time in endgames knowing that draw claims are unlikely.

[Roger de Coverly]

10 second increment also makes it far too easy for people to build up/waste time in endgames knowing that draw claims are unlikely.

Draw claims would be impossible surely unless you can persuade an arbiter to observe and count.

Long ago, I can recall playing in a West London based 10 second a move team event. This would have been buzzer based and had a special rule that the buzzer speeded up to five seconds a move in an attempt to complete the round. I have a vague memory that even that was time limited, and an adjudication would take place on any games that lasted too long.