FIDE updates rating regulations to include faster time controls for major events

[LawrenceCooper]

https://www.fide.com/fide-updates-ratin ... or-events/

[Roger de Coverly]

Key points

1. To approve that, as a continuation of the pilot project, tournaments held in 2026 with a time control of 45’+30’’ (or longer, e.g., 60’+30’’) and preliminarily approved by the QC, will be counted for the standard rating.
2. The QC is authorised to approve such tournaments provided they are major or traditional events, are supported by a national or continental federation, comply with all FIDE regulations, and conduct no more than two playing rounds per day. Relevant requests must be submitted to the QC no later than one month before tthe start of the event.

That would seem to imply that a weekend event with a time control of say 75 minutes with 30 second increments is now eligible to have all games rated even if players rated above 2400 are involved.

It would still seem to rule out players with ratings above 2400 being rated in such an event with a shorter increment if there are three rounds on one of the days.

Playing two rounds of 90 30 has long been possible for Norm tournaments, so it's not clear why this change would enable more Norm tournaments.

45 + 30 is 75 minutes to move 60 so is twice as fast as the traditional 30 in an hour and a quarter move rate formerly popular.

It occurred to me there was a historic reason for that move rate. Until the mid 1970s, many pubs were forced to close at 10.30 pm. Thus a 7.30 pm start coupled with a two and a half hour session gave time to make it to the pub or bar before last orders. That wouldn't have been possible with three hour sessions.

[LawrenceCooper]

Key points

1. To approve that, as a continuation of the pilot project, tournaments held in 2026 with a time control of 45’+30’’ (or longer, e.g., 60’+30’’) and preliminarily approved by the QC, will be counted for the standard rating.
2. The QC is authorised to approve such tournaments provided they are major or traditional events, are supported by a national or continental federation, comply with all FIDE regulations, and conduct no more than two playing rounds per day. Relevant requests must be submitted to the QC no later than one month before tthe start of the event.

That would seem to imply that a weekend event with a time control of say 75 minutes with 30 second increments is now eligible to have all games rated even if players rated above 2400 are involved.

It would still seem to rule out players with ratings above 2400 being rated in such an event with a shorter increment if there are three rounds on one of the days.

Playing two rounds of 90 30 has long been possible for Norm tournaments, so it's not clear why this change would enable more Norm tournaments.

45 + 30 is 75 minutes to move 60 so is twice as fast as the traditional 30 in an hour and a quarter move rate formerly popular.

It occurred to me there was a historic reason for that move rate. Until the mid 1970s, many pubs were forced to close at 10.30 pm. Thus a 7.30 pm start coupled with a two and a half hour session gave time to make it to the pub or bar before last orders. That wouldn't have been possible with three hour sessions.

Also of relevance to organisers:

⁠ Norm limitations: While players as well as arbiters and organisers will be able to earn norms in these events, a maximum of one such norm may count toward any single title (such as Grandmaster or International Master).
⁠ Schedule limits: To prevent fatigue and maintain quality of play, approved tournaments may run no more than two rounds per day.

[IM Jack Rudd]

The decision seems weird overall. Surely the way to test these sorts of things is with minor events, local weekenders and the like, and then you get feedback on how well it works with those before you extend it to title-norm events.

[Tim Spanton]

One point is that it would make many evening-league games Fide rateable, thus reducing the need for a separate national rating

[Roger de Coverly]

One point is that it would make many evening-league games Fide rateable, thus reducing the need for a separate national rating

From my reading of it, a 30 second increment remains compulsory. Most leagues would want a shorter increment to reduce the opportunity for games going past even the hours of venues with flexible closing times.

I have the idea that rated league evening play is less common in many chess federations than in the UK.

[Pete Morriss]

The decision seems weird overall. Surely the way to test these sorts of things is with minor events, local weekenders and the like, and then you get feedback on how well it works with those before you extend it to title-norm events.

I can't see what the point of this is supposed to be when more than two games a day are not allowed. Tournaments with two games a day at 90+30 are quite common, so what is to be gained by two games at 45+30, except a lot of hanging around?

It seems from the FIDE announcement that they have elite events in mind (it is aimed at "major or traditional tournaments"), and have no interest in minor events, but it remains a mystery what the rationale is. Do they envisage an Olympiad with two games a day at 45+30?

[Chris Goodall]

One point is that it would make many evening-league games Fide rateable, thus reducing the need for a separate national rating

Rateable yes, but unlikely to be rated unless FIDE arbiters can be at every evening league venue?

[IM Jack Rudd]

You don't need an arbiter to be present for a generic FIDE-rated event, only for a title-norm event.

[Richard Bates]

Key points

1. To approve that, as a continuation of the pilot project, tournaments held in 2026 with a time control of 45’+30’’ (or longer, e.g., 60’+30’’) and preliminarily approved by the QC, will be counted for the standard rating.
2. The QC is authorised to approve such tournaments provided they are major or traditional events, are supported by a national or continental federation, comply with all FIDE regulations, and conduct no more than two playing rounds per day. Relevant requests must be submitted to the QC no later than one month before tthe start of the event.

That would seem to imply that a weekend event with a time control of say 75 minutes with 30 second increments is now eligible to have all games rated even if players rated above 2400 are involved.

It would still seem to rule out players with ratings above 2400 being rated in such an event with a shorter increment if there are three rounds on one of the days.

Playing two rounds of 90 30 has long been possible for Norm tournaments, so it's not clear why this change would enable more Norm tournaments.

45 + 30 is 75 minutes to move 60 so is twice as fast as the traditional 30 in an hour and a quarter move rate formerly popular.

It occurred to me there was a historic reason for that move rate. Until the mid 1970s, many pubs were forced to close at 10.30 pm. Thus a 7.30 pm start coupled with a two and a half hour session gave time to make it to the pub or bar before last orders. That wouldn't have been possible with three hour sessions.

Also of relevance to organisers:

⁠ Norm limitations: While players as well as arbiters and organisers will be able to earn norms in these events, a maximum of one such norm may count toward any single title (such as Grandmaster or International Master).
⁠ Schedule limits: To prevent fatigue and maintain quality of play, approved tournaments may run no more than two rounds per day.

Gotta love the argument that it is the “fatigue” of playing 3 rounds a day that interferes with quality of play but not playing chess with no serious time to think.

[LawrenceCooper]

Gotta love the argument that it is the “fatigue” of playing 3 rounds a day that interferes with quality of play but not playing chess with no serious time to think.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Gotta love the argument that it is the “fatigue” of playing 3 rounds a day that interferes with quality of play but not playing chess with no serious time to think.

Well, yes... (in the absence of a "like" button).

[Matt Mackenzie]

Though if you are tired, quick chess is arguably preferable.

[Alex Holowczak]

The decision seems weird overall. Surely the way to test these sorts of things is with minor events, local weekenders and the like, and then you get feedback on how well it works with those before you extend it to title-norm events.

Except that minor events can already play three games a day at 60+30, just that games for players rated >2400 can't be rated.

Gotta love the argument that it is the “fatigue” of playing 3 rounds a day that interferes with quality of play but not playing chess with no serious time to think.

Except it's stranger than that - a 2400+ player can play, for rating points:
- 3 games of 90 + 30 per day
- 2 games of 45 + 30 per day, but not 3 because it is too tiring

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Except it's stranger than that - a 2400+ player can play, for rating points:
- 3 games of 90 + 30 per day
- 2 games of 45 + 30 per day, but not 3 because it is too tiring"

Ah, I suspect you're making the mistake of expecting the rules to be logical and coherent.