PDA

View Full Version : Norway Chess 2019 - unusual format



Kevin Bonham
11-10-2018, 01:11 AM
http://norwaychess.no/en/2018/10/10/new-and-exciting-playing-format-for-2019/

2 hours per player per game, no increment

2 points for a win, 0 for a loss
If game is drawn, each player gets 1/2 a point, then they play Armageddon with the same colours as the game for 1 point.

MichaelBaron
11-10-2018, 02:44 AM
http://norwaychess.no/en/2018/10/10/new-and-exciting-playing-format-for-2019/

2 hours per player per game, no increment

2 points for a win, 0 for a loss
If game is drawn, each player gets 1/2 a point, then they play Armageddon with the same colours as the game for 1 point.

If this format does attract greater following/media attention than the conventional ones - this may be the way to go!

antichrist
11-10-2018, 07:11 AM
http://norwaychess.no/en/2018/10/10/new-and-exciting-playing-format-for-2019/

2 hours per player per game, no increment

2 points for a win, 0 for a loss
If game is drawn, each player gets 1/2 a point, then they play Armageddon with the same colours as the game for 1 point.

Would this concept go in completely opposite direction of players supposedly not wanting games supposedly decided by the clock? I love the idea with the Armageddon game preventing draws but could be unfair to older players who would be more tired after 4 hours of solid chess.

Kevin Bonham
11-10-2018, 11:01 AM
Some people in FIDE might not be amused - FIDE has been trying to kill off this kind of time control and it could even be removed from the Laws of Chess 2021. Apart from scheduling perhaps I don't see why they don't make things easier for the poor arbiters with an increment, even if it is only say 2 secs/move. You don't want "normal means" draw claims in an elite event.

What we have seen in the past is that when some top players play at this sort of time control - or even 40 moves in 2 hours with no increments - their time management is completely horrible and is the decisive factor in some games.

I wonder if Grischuk will be invited.

Garvinator
11-10-2018, 04:46 PM
Some people in FIDE might not be amused - FIDE has been trying to kill off this kind of time control and it could even be removed from the Laws of Chess 2021. Apart from scheduling perhaps I don't see why they don't make things easier for the poor arbiters with an increment, even if it is only say 2 secs/move. You don't want "normal means" draw claims in an elite event.
They could just add what we in Australia use as the standard increment of 10 seconds per move, even make it the Bronstein 10 seconds per move, and solve all their problems.

MichaelBaron
11-10-2018, 05:20 PM
They could just add what we in Australia use as the standard increment of 10 seconds per move, even make it the Bronstein 10 seconds per move, and solve all their problems.

If you want to show games live on TV - you have to be sure that they end within a certain time frame. This is why having no increment may be more appealing. Furthermore, guillotine finish makes it more exciting for the audience :).

antichrist
11-10-2018, 07:22 PM
Some people in FIDE might not be amused - FIDE has been trying to kill off this kind of time control and it could even be removed from the Laws of Chess 2021. Apart from scheduling perhaps I don't see why they don't make things easier for the poor arbiters with an increment, even if it is only say 2 secs/move. You don't want "normal means" draw claims in an elite event.

What we have seen in the past is that when some top players play at this sort of time control - or even 40 moves in 2 hours with no increments - their time management is completely horrible and is the decisive factor in some games.

I wonder if Grischuk will be invited.

I can't understand why the arbiters have to be taken into account much. At last someone has finally stated it is about helping the arbiters, I was always suspicious of this because no one ever complained of my tournaments with guillotine finish. I am sure that alternative arbiters can be found if some don't want some leg exercise just as an alternative international chess federation can be set up if the current is too inflexible. Just as I set my own tourney when none suited my playing agenda. I have gone around adjusting manual clocks after 90 minutes and it did not hurt me in the slightest.

antichrist
11-10-2018, 07:28 PM
If you want to show games live on TV - you have to be sure that they end within a certain time frame. This is why having no increment may be more appealing. Furthermore, guillotine finish makes it more exciting for the audience :).

Spot on bro. Those exciting finishes was exactly what I missed when watching the top boards. That Armageddon Finish makes it like the penalty shoot out in soccer and like a Golden Point finish in NRL. And if some player's time management is horrible then they obviously don't to deserve to win over a better calibrated player or choose a tournament that better reflect their skills.

Kevin Bonham
11-10-2018, 07:29 PM
I can't understand why the arbiters have to be taken into account much.

At this level the issue isn't making it easy for the arbiters since one would hope the arbiters would be very experienced. Rather, the issue is avoiding having games decided by rules that players do not often see and hence don't understand, the application of which can be controversial.

antichrist
11-10-2018, 07:34 PM
At this level the issue isn't making it easy for the arbiters since one would hope the arbiters would be very experienced. Rather, the issue is avoiding having games decided by rules that players do not often see and hence don't understand, the application of which can be controversial.

Would not the same problem of "new" unusual format also have occurred when digital clocks and increment time were first introduced. As well there are all the different models of digital clocks with all different teething problems. I consider them not much different to root canal therapy.

Kevin Bonham
11-10-2018, 07:43 PM
Would not the same problem of "new" unusual format also have occurred when digital clocks and increment time were first introduced.

Not really because one advantage of increments is they remove the need for the draw claim rules in question.

This is not an analogue vs digital clock thread (after all digital clocks will be used in this event) and all further discussion of that topic on this thread is banned.

BlairMandla
12-10-2018, 09:36 AM
If we start using this time control in AUS, I might actually start playing regularly again.

Garvinator
12-10-2018, 08:43 PM
If we start using this time control in AUS, I might actually start playing regularly again.
Why would a time control of 120/0 be more attractive to you than 90/10, which is used in some tournaments?

BlairMandla
15-10-2018, 08:33 AM
I simply believe that Chess like other sports should be played within a finite amount of time. And that players reserve the right to attempt to win on time regardless of the position.
Players whom mismanage their time deserve to pay the consequences of this decision / pressure and should not be rewarded with extra time for simply completing a move. Please note I am not against secondary and third time controls upon reaching move 40 or 60.

The real problem is highlighted above with arbiters. They will actually need to do some additional work and ensure they are consistent with the G4-G6 draw claim rulings and ensure players are educated in the process.
Being consistent with the above, I think G4 is pretty much rubbish and that G5 should be followed.