PDA

View Full Version : sillytime controls



cafman
25-09-2005, 04:34 PM
As a "blow in" I am astounded by the ridiculous time limits at weekend tournaments here and the fact that these games can be rated as if they were "proper" games. Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf, as I have seen my rating decimated by over 200 points in four months but as a player who has held a 2000+ rating for over 20 years I know that my standard of play has not suddenly dropped but yet I find myself losing game after game ,on time, against people I would normally expect to give at least pawn odds to, in what are clearly won positions for me. In europe at a weekender we play only 6 rounds but have 105 minutes(EACH) per game. This allows proper care and attention to be given to every move and also allows for endgames to be played properly. Here, with the ludicrous 60 minutes +10 second incriment the position on the board is largely irrelevant as the clock will ultimately be the deciding factor. It is little wonder that the only people who play in weekend competitions here are kids who know they will cause upsets and titled players who know they'll win money. I think a lot more adults would play if we returned to proper time limits but perhaps I am alone in this view.

Alan Shore
25-09-2005, 04:59 PM
As a "blow in" I am astounded by the ridiculous time limits at weekend tournaments here and the fact that these games can be rated as if they were "proper" games. Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf, as I have seen my rating decimated by over 200 points in four months but as a player who has held a 2000+ rating for over 20 years I know that my standard of play has not suddenly dropped but yet I find myself losing game after game ,on time, against people I would normally expect to give at least pawn odds to, in what are clearly won positions for me. In europe at a weekender we play only 6 rounds but have 105 minutes(EACH) per game. This allows proper care and attention to be given to every move and also allows for endgames to be played properly. Here, with the ludicrous 60 minutes +10 second incriment the position on the board is largely irrelevant as the clock will ultimately be the deciding factor. It is little wonder that the only people who play in weekend competitions here are kids who know they will cause upsets and titled players who know they'll win money. I think a lot more adults would play if we returned to proper time limits but perhaps I am alone in this view.


Perhaps it's not the time and you're just getting a little more docile in your old age? j/k ;)

For the most part though, time is part of the game. If you really dislike the 60 min time controls then you could restrict yourself to participating in events with longer time controls, yet 60 mins is a lot of time and certainly enough for a standard game - hell, I think 30 mins/side is heaps.

bergil
25-09-2005, 05:01 PM
As a "blow in" I am astounded by the ridiculous time limits at weekend tournaments here and the fact that these games can be rated as if they were "proper" games. Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf, as I have seen my rating decimated by over 200 points in four months but as a player who has held a 2000+ rating for over 20 years I know that my standard of play has not suddenly dropped but yet I find myself losing game after game ,on time, against people I would normally expect to give at least pawn odds to, in what are clearly won positions for me. In europe at a weekender we play only 6 rounds but have 105 minutes(EACH) per game. This allows proper care and attention to be given to every move and also allows for endgames to be played properly. Here, with the ludicrous 60 minutes +10 second incriment the position on the board is largely irrelevant as the clock will ultimately be the deciding factor. It is little wonder that the only people who play in weekend competitions here are kids who know they will cause upsets and titled players who know they'll win money. I think a lot more adults would play if we returned to proper time limits but perhaps I am alone in this view.
If you play any longer than 60min+10sec you can't play seven games in a weekend and a 6 round swiss at Fairfield's Winter Cup saw the winner not play the top seed who finished equal second.

cafman
25-09-2005, 05:30 PM
Im not so sure that 7 rounds are better than six. For a start certain players get four games as white with seven rounds and at least with longer time controls there is more chance of the strongest player winning rather than someone just getting swindled on time after completely outplaying their opponent. There is a trend in sport nowadays to have an instant winner, the world soccer cup is even decided on penalties after 4 years of competition to get to the final, but I see nothing wrong with joint winners nor do I see anything wrong with a close fought game between to equals ending in a draw. Everything has to be "instant" nowadays for some strange reason. Can any real lover of cricket honestly say a one day game is better than a test match? The same applies to classic chess V glorified blitz.

Garvinator
25-09-2005, 05:34 PM
In some tournaments the 7th round is required as the numbers of the tournament are over 64. Not such a problem in qld ;) as we either run two division tournaments or dont have over 64 players.

CAQ tournaments are generally 60/30 and six rounds instead of 7 for the reasons you have mentioned and generally because the 7th round isnt required.

Denis_Jessop
25-09-2005, 05:53 PM
As a "blow in" I am astounded by the ridiculous time limits at weekend tournaments here and the fact that these games can be rated as if they were "proper" games. Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf, as I have seen my rating decimated by over 200 points in four months but as a player who has held a 2000+ rating for over 20 years I know that my standard of play has not suddenly dropped but yet I find myself losing game after game ,on time, against people I would normally expect to give at least pawn odds to, in what are clearly won positions for me. In europe at a weekender we play only 6 rounds but have 105 minutes(EACH) per game. This allows proper care and attention to be given to every move and also allows for endgames to be played properly. Here, with the ludicrous 60 minutes +10 second incriment the position on the board is largely irrelevant as the clock will ultimately be the deciding factor. It is little wonder that the only people who play in weekend competitions here are kids who know they will cause upsets and titled players who know they'll win money. I think a lot more adults would play if we returned to proper time limits but perhaps I am alone in this view.

Have you considered the possibility that you may not be getting any weaker but the opposition is getting rather stronger?

As others have pointed out a proper weekender (one with enough rounds) can't be run at the longer time limits unless the weekend is 4 days as at Easter. Moreover, even then older players are not guaranteed success, as one technique used by young players, mentioned by Leonard Barden in his "Guardian" chess column last week, is to exhaust older players by use of very long games.

DJ

cafman
25-09-2005, 06:00 PM
There is no doubt that the ratings of players here are artificially low ,probably due to the lack of foreign players and the predominance of kids in most competitions.Also, ratings tend to get distorted when competitions are usually opens and not restricted to players within certain bands and when a disproportionate amount of games are decided by time.

Bill Gletsos
25-09-2005, 06:05 PM
There is no doubt that the ratings of players here are artificially low ,probably due to the lack of foreign players and the predominance of kids in most competitions.Also, ratings tend to get distorted when competitions are usually opens and not restricted to players within certain bands and when a disproportionate amount of games are decided by time.So what is your excuse for your poor performance in the 2005 NSW Open. It was played at 90mins +30 secs a move from move 1. So you cannot blame the time control for that one and the ratings of your opponents were all reliable.

Bill Gletsos
25-09-2005, 06:08 PM
In some tournaments the 7th round is required as the numbers of the tournament are over 64. Not such a problem in qld ;) as we either run two division tournaments or dont have over 64 players.

CAQ tournaments are generally 60/30 and six rounds instead of 7 for the reasons you have mentioned and generally because the 7th round isnt required.Also a distinct problem with 6 rounds is the dreaded 4-2 colour split unless it is a white biased 4-2 colour split. ;)

Garvinator
25-09-2005, 06:09 PM
Also a distinct problem with 6 rounds is the dreaded 4-2 colour split unless it is a white biased 4-2 colour split. ;)
well aware of that ;)

jase
25-09-2005, 06:36 PM
Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf

Correct.

You're older, slower, and may need your rose coloured glasses surgically removed.

There are many more tournaments, and therefore a far greater variety of time controls, in Europe. In particular there is a far higher proportion of RapidPlay (ie faster TCs) events in Europe for tournaments conducted over weekends. Searching through several websites devoted to publicising chess in Europe, I looked up about 50 tournaments and found a total of none with a TC of 105 minutes each over a 2 day weekend.

Scheduling a 6 round tournament over a weekend with this TC, allowing for a 10am start, would see games wrapping up after 9pm on both days - a concept many would consider "ludicrous". Through the 1980s and 1990s many weekenders commenced on Friday nights, to fit a TC of 40/90 + 30 to finish. The late night rounds were often a battle of attrition rather than providing for the better quality chess as cafman submits.

antichrist
25-09-2005, 06:49 PM
If you play any longer than 60min+10sec you can't play seven games in a weekend and a 6 round swiss at Fairfield's Winter Cup saw the winner not play the top seed who finished equal second.

If they did not have the +10 sec increment they could have easier fitted in 7 rounds of G60 min. Players still lose on time with the +10 sec increment so why have it and wreck schedules and number of rounds.

pax
25-09-2005, 08:30 PM
So what is your excuse for your poor performance in the 2005 NSW Open. It was played at 90mins +30 secs a move from move 1. So you cannot blame the time control for that one and the ratings of your opponents were all reliable.

Ouch, he's got you there :hand:

cafman
25-09-2005, 09:00 PM
I do not pretend to be Kramnik and unlike him have never had an unbeaten run of 82 games. NSW Open was indeed a disaster for me but in my defence I hadn't played ANY chess between Nov 2002 and feb 2005,,,,,,,,also on the sat night of the nws open I was so sick that I had to go to hospital and was on medication throughout the tournament, perhaps only losing two games wasnt so bad after all!!
More to the point ,silly occurences like Stephen Solomon losing a whole rook to a 13oo rated player(nell Van de Graaf Classic),Ian Rogers losing to a 19 something on time (Sydney or robina, I cant remember which,) and me losing to an 11something on time while an exchange up,,,,,,,or on time to a 1400 when I had a forced win , wouldnt happen so often with proper time controls.
As for the person who commented on European tournaments,,,Ive played all over europe for almost 30 years and have never played in a competition where I had less than 90 minutes for my moves unless it was a blitz or rapid,in which case it isnt rated. Results apart, I love playing chess and when I get an interesting position there is nothing I like better than having the time to analyse it to the best of my ability and to enjoy the sheer beauty of the game.Most chessplayers just want a point on the board and seem happy to get that even on time if theyve been completely outplayed, a bit shallow and superficial if you ask me!!

Rincewind
25-09-2005, 09:06 PM
More to the point ,silly occurences like Stephen Solomon losing a whole rook to a 13oo rated player(nell Van de Graaf Classic)

Hey, that rook was a sac based on avoiding a forced draw. Solo correctly judged he could come back and win. At 90+30 he may have decided to cut his loses, you'd have to ask him, but I like to think he would have still saced the rook. :)

Thunderspirit
25-09-2005, 09:47 PM
As a "blow in" I am astounded by the ridiculous time limits at weekend tournaments here and the fact that these games can be rated as if they were "proper" games. Perhaps it is sour grapes on my behalf, as I have seen my rating decimated by over 200 points in four months but as a player who has held a 2000+ rating for over 20 years I know that my standard of play has not suddenly dropped but yet I find myself losing game after game ,on time, against people I would normally expect to give at least pawn odds to, in what are clearly won positions for me. In europe at a weekender we play only 6 rounds but have 105 minutes(EACH) per game. This allows proper care and attention to be given to every move and also allows for endgames to be played properly. Here, with the ludicrous 60 minutes +10 second incriment the position on the board is largely irrelevant as the clock will ultimately be the deciding factor. It is little wonder that the only people who play in weekend competitions here are kids who know they will cause upsets and titled players who know they'll win money. I think a lot more adults would play if we returned to proper time limits but perhaps I am alone in this view.

Cafman makes some good points. Here is both sides of the debate. Most nations in the world (including NZ for example) require a game to have a 4 hr time control for the games to be proper tournament games. The European weekender time limits I played earlier in the year were 40/105 + g/15 a time limit I like.

From my understanding about 15 years ago a decision was made to shorten the length of time from a 4 hr game to a 2 hr game to assist in the development of weekend events. While European events have longer time limits, restrictions on travel are so difficult and it was to encourage people playing from interstate. Weekenders used to be 40/90 + g/30 with 5 rounds over a weekend. One obvious problem is that if more than 32 players enter than theoretically you can have more than one player on 5/5. Half point byes were avaliable on Friday night rounds when 6 rounds was offered, but players didn't like this here in Oz. It is widely used in Europe.

The beniefts of g/60 (or g/60 +10 sec) is that it possible to have more players, more travel and more particpation in Australian chess. Shorter time limits have helped in this regards especially with juniors.

My concern is more that the long weekends in Australia aren't used to run 7 round FIDE rated events as often as they should. Next weekend is a long weekend in Sydney, and no FIDE event is being run. The clash with the NRL grandfinal is given as the cause, but if 3 rounds were played on the Saturday and 2 on the Sunday, it would have been possible.

The other alternative is to run a weekend where it is 5 rounds over 2 days, but rather being a swiss the events are 6 round, round-robin in divisions. Time limits could be extended, and the events would be a novel way to give players opponents of a similar standard.

But you cant have it both ways... Long time limits in Swisses over a standard weekend. It causes too much problems with transport, unless are happy for a small local event....

Garvinator
25-09-2005, 09:55 PM
More to the point ,silly occurences like Stephen Solomon losing a whole rook to a 13oo rated player(nell Van de Graaf Classic),Ian Rogers losing to a 19 something on time (Sydney or robina, I cant remember which,)

Cafman, if you are going to make headway with debates on here, then you are going to have to do alot better than these two examples to prove your point.

Firstly, my game v Solo, which is given here : http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=2936

As RW has posted:
Hey, that rook was a sac based on avoiding a forced draw. Solo correctly judged he could come back and win. At 90+30 he may have decided to cut his loses, you'd have to ask him, but I like to think he would have still saced the rook.
Also I will add that actually it was my time trouble that caused me to get into real trouble in the game. Maybe if the time control was 90/30, then I would not have got into such difficulties regarding time and would have taken more advantage of my rook and two pawns.

The time control in this game had nothing to solo being a rook down. It was straight out of the opening that I had a forced draw if solo allowed it. He didnt and was the better player over the rest of the game.

In the second example, I think you are referring to Ian Rogers v Junta Ikeda, which if my memory serves me correctly was at the nsw open, which was played at 90/30. So no 60/10 time trouble there.

On a slightly different topic but I believe very relevant for this discussion, it is well known out here that there is usually at least a 100 point difference between a person fide rating and their acf rating for players rated below 2100 approx.

cafman
25-09-2005, 09:58 PM
I have yet to hear a single reason why fast time controls are better than the traditional ones. Apart from a few digs at me all the whizz kids have to offer is that they have to be in bed by 9pm and that they'd get too tired(poor things) having to spend more than a couple of hours at the board. Perhaps their attention span just can't cope with proper time limits or maybe they're afraid that their ratings would drop because they wouldn't get any more "scalps" in future

Thunderspirit
25-09-2005, 10:02 PM
I have yet to hear a single reason why fast time controls are better than the traditional ones. Apart from a few digs at me all the whizz kids have to offer is that they have to be in bed by 9pm and that they'd get too tired(poor things) having to spend more than a couple of hours at the board. Perhaps their attention span just can't cope with proper time limits or maybe they're afraid that their ratings would drop because they wouldn't get any more "scalps" in future


Did U read my suggestions?

cafman
25-09-2005, 10:05 PM
why on earth would anyone want to force a draw from the opening? Why play chess at all if you are THAT scared? I really find that kind of attitude pathetic.

Kevin Bonham
25-09-2005, 10:08 PM
Im not so sure that 7 rounds are better than six. For a start certain players get four games as white with seven rounds

As Ian Rout pointed out in successfully converting me to odd numbers of rounds for Swisses where possible, in the first round the rating differences are usually so large that colour is irrelevant. It is more important that players get an even split for the real games and with an odd number of rounds this is more likely.

G60/+10 should give you time to win any totally won position. If you use up more time than the opponent to get a position that is won but not a straightforward win, then chances are you would not have got such a good position had you played quickly enough for the time control.

(And if you think that's bad, I play a lot of my main-list-rated games at G60 flat.)

Thunderspirit
25-09-2005, 10:09 PM
why on earth would anyone want to force a draw from the opening? Why play chess at all if you are THAT scared? I really find that kind of attitude pathetic.


Post 277, gave some suggestions to your problems... U haven't given comment on these suggestions...

cafman
25-09-2005, 10:10 PM
At least Liberace makes some valid points and puts them across well unlike some of the smaller minded people who have posted replies!!

cafman
25-09-2005, 10:13 PM
Hey!! maybe it's just that organisers of events don't want to have to work longer hours? Touche!

Thunderspirit
25-09-2005, 10:14 PM
At least Liberace makes some valid points and puts them across well unlike some of the smaller minded people who have posted replies!!

I disgaree with Kevin, who says that an extra 10 sec a move is enough to win a won position. 10 seconds is nothing, I have seen too many players loose on time.... I would always rather have a one off time increase rather than a small increase each move. Hence I would prefer 40/90 + g/30 than 90 + 30 sec/move

jase
25-09-2005, 10:23 PM
At least Liberace makes some valid points and puts them across well unlike some of the smaller minded people who have posted replies!!

You'll fit right in here. Just abuse everyone whose views differ from your own. :rambo:

cafman
25-09-2005, 10:35 PM
Dear Jase ( or should i Call you GOD?) if you look back at YOUR first thread you will see who it was that started the abuse! My rating drop really doesn't bother me because I know I will get the points back when I play a few week long tournaments. All I am saying is that there is plenty of time in a weekend to have longer games, in Britain and Ireland play usually goes until about 10pm on the sat and 4 or 5 on the sunday, what is wrong with that?

Kevin Bonham
25-09-2005, 10:41 PM
I disgaree with Kevin, who says that an extra 10 sec a move is enough to win a won position.

I did say a totally won position. Not just something like exchange up, but something that's so much over that apart from the clock, the other player should resign.

10 secs may be nothing but in a totally won position you can make a lot of quick moves in less than that and build up a bit of spare time.

pax
26-09-2005, 09:45 AM
Look, the solution is simple. If you don't like 60/10 so much, then simply don't play two day weekenders. Simple! Stick to three day weekenders, club events, team leagues, State Championships and the like.

I too prefer a longer time control, but unfortunately it just isn't practical for an Open tournament over two days. You could do it with divisions as Liberace suggests, but I think you'd find six player divisions would be a massive turnoff for players. A six round swiss is a very bad idea as mentioned, due to the 4-2 colour split. And a five round swiss is hopeless for more than 32 players and is only decent if the numbers are below about 24.

Trent Parker
26-09-2005, 10:36 AM
why on earth would anyone want to force a draw from the opening? Why play chess at all if you are THAT scared? I really find that kind of attitude pathetic.

at ggray's rating. I would consider a draw against stephen solomon a win!!! :D

Dozy
26-09-2005, 10:37 AM
I have yet to hear a single reason why fast time controls are better than the traditional ones. Apart from a few digs at me all the whizz kids have to offer is that they have to be in bed by 9pm and that they'd get too tired(poor things) having to spend more than a couple of hours at the board. Perhaps their attention span just can't cope with proper time limits or maybe they're afraid that their ratings would drop because they wouldn't get any more "scalps" in future
It's been a year or two since I was a kid (and I was NEVER a whiz kid) but you comment raises an interesting point.

Whether or not the younger kids benefit from an early night I know we older people certainly do. Out of condition and over the hill, that's me, and I really appreciate getting a quick game on the final round of the day, particularly as I live on the Blue Mountains and have to drive home after play.

That's not intended to be a whinge. I love chess, and I love to play tournaments--but there are a lot of people playing tournaments who are in my category and we're not (normally) the people who win the prizes, though it does happen sometimes.

We are people who get tired by the end of the day's play.

But we pay entry fees and help to make tournaments viable and with attendances falling organisers are aware of the needs of various groups,

So whether players are older or younger doesn't matter. If the shorter format means that more people feel they can commit a weekend to a tournament then it's probably worth while.

You asked for a single reason? EZ! Bums on seats.

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 10:55 AM
why on earth would anyone want to force a draw from the opening? Why play chess at all if you are THAT scared? I really find that kind of attitude pathetic.

ggrayggray may like to comment. However I don't believe Garvin started the game looking to force a draw. He may have not even taken the draw if it was on offer. However the fact that one was there for the taking caused Solo to sac the rook, not the time trouble. As Trent points out, due to the rating mismatch, a draw would have been a good result for Garvin and a bad one for Stephen. You can view the thread on this game here (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=2936).

cafman
26-09-2005, 11:06 AM
If I was to boycott weekenders then I wouldnt get to play competitive chess very often as there is no league chess on gold coast and Australia is a bit cut off from the rest of the world to nip across and play any opens elsewhere.(Yes , Yes, I know some smart ass is already typing "then why the hell don't you just leave?",,,cos it's nice and sunny here,,thats why!) It isn't neccessary to completely restructure weekend tournaments, even if the time limit was extended to something like 30 moves in 75mins + 30second incriments to kick in when that has elapsed there would still be plenty of time to play a 7round weekender as a 40 move game would still only last 160mins maximum, and the unusual occurence of an 80 move game would still only take 200 minutes max. At least then a player would always have at least 30 seconds per move and enough time to conduct an endgame without having a heart attack.

cafman
26-09-2005, 11:22 AM
Ok Ok pedantics1-0 Cafman,,,,,maybe it was a rook sac and I was wrong,,so burn me at the stake then alright? just please stop droning on and on about it,,,,,,,I was playing a game at the same time myself and all I saw was a position where Solo didn't seem to have anything for a rook so I presumed he'd blundered.
I disagree with the bums on seats argument, I think more people would play if the games were longer. I too am in the knackered by dusk category but if I travel a long distance to a weekender I'd sooner play chess on the saturday night than watch tv in my room or be out spending money on booze or whatever. Another way to entice entrants is to have tournaments divided into over 1600(or1700) sections and under 1600(or1700)instead of opens. In the recent Nell Van De Graaf Classic I played Solo who is a few hundred points higher than me and beat me easily and 5 guys under 1400 all of which I easily outplayed in uninteresting games ,oh!? and just for the record I lost on time(AGAIN) to a 15 something when I had a completely won position. So,,,7 uncompetitive games,,,,,,,a lot of fun that was,,,,,,,,,NOT

pax
26-09-2005, 11:46 AM
It isn't neccessary to completely restructure weekend tournaments, even if the time limit was extended to something like 30 moves in 75mins + 30second incriments to kick in when that has elapsed there would still be plenty of time to play a 7round weekender as a 40 move game would still only last 160mins maximum, and the unusual occurence of an 80 move game would still only take 200 minutes max.

Hmm, four rounds in a day, three hours per round (minimum) - 9am to 10pm (if you're lucky).

Here's a suggestion: why don't you run a two day weekender with those time controls and see how many people turn up. If you are right, they will turn up in droves.

Ian Rout
26-09-2005, 11:51 AM
I think it would be good if there were more longer time limit weekenders - at present there is the Doeberl Cup and the NSW and Vic Opens (which are on the same weekend so you can't play in both). However there is a shortage of long weekends - Australia Day is just after the Aust Championship, Anzac Day may not be a long weekend, and Labour Day clashes with the NRL grand final.

If the chess market was bigger then tournaments taking in weekdays might be viable, as sufficient numbers would be prepared and able to use a day or two of their holidays to play.

As it is the 60/10 is a good compromise. Games don't go on too long but long enough to not be Rapid, and the ten-second increment means that players cannot just shuffle pieces around waiting for flag fall. It also allows seven rounds which I find vastly superior - six is a bit too much like a knockout.

I have some sympathy for cafman but I think it does come down to the market deciding and he will need to demonstrate that demand exists. "Are long time limits better?" is just a debating topic to which there is no real answer. Maybe a poll with questions like "Would you play in a tournament with these conditions: a) b) c) ..."; or put up a detailed proposal. (Personally I'm not attracted to his 75/30, I find it not really one thing or the other, but that's just my view.)

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 11:52 AM
Ok Ok pedantics1-0 Cafman,,,,,maybe it was a rook sac and I was wrong,,so burn me at the stake then alright? just please stop droning on and on about it,,,,,,,I was playing a game at the same time myself and all I saw was a position where Solo didn't seem to have anything for a rook so I presumed he'd blundered.

Did you skip the lectures in How to admit a mistake graciously 101?

four four two
26-09-2005, 11:56 AM
Cafman,I think there is room for both the 60min/rapid and the 75-90min type weekenders you prefer .Part of the problem is that in australia there arent that many 7 rounds in 3 days tournaments,so players often dont have the stamina to play at their best.If there were more 7 round tournaments the players would gradually cope with the format,and the ones who find it to tough would stick with the rapid type tournaments.Thus everyone would have a format that suits them.

The Geelong open in Victoria is on the 1 and 2 of October,6 round swiss with 75 minute guillotine: $1000 for first,$500 for 2nd and $250 for 3rd,entry fee is $25 more info at geelongchess@aapt.net.au So if your in victoria and you have got the time support this tournament! And no Im not an organiser. ;)

Garvinator
26-09-2005, 11:59 AM
ggrayggray may like to comment. However I don't believe Garvin started the game looking to force a draw. He may have not even taken the draw if it was on offer. However the fact that one was there for the taking caused Solo to sac the rook, not the time trouble. As Trent points out, due to the rating mismatch, a draw would have been a good result for Garvin and a bad one for Stephen. You can view the thread on this game here (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=2936).
I actually remember commenting in the linked thread that with a passed h pawn, developing bishop on e2 and castling etc, that I might have played on had Solo castled on move 20. Well anyways, I wasnt given that opportunity.

WhiteElephant
26-09-2005, 12:00 PM
One of the ugliest things about this BB (and there are many great things) is how the haters and sarcastic yes men gang up on newbies. Ian has explained it very well - longer time controls are not viable in Australian weekenders due to the smaller market and people's time constraints. All you other guys with your sarcastic put downs, give cafman a break, he has a right to an opinion.

Garvinator
26-09-2005, 12:10 PM
I disagree with the bums on seats argument, I think more people would play if the games were longer.

Wrong, unfortunately. My experience up here as organiser, dop and tournament officer is that most of the players want play to finish roughly when the sun goes down. They hate playing weekend chess at night. Even more than this, some of the players will take a bye in round 4 on saturday when playing 60/10.

I ran a tournament last year which started at 12pm on both days. I was trying out whether the later start helped or hindered numbers. Even though we got similiar numbers to other tournaments, half the field of 25 took byes in round 4 on saturday. It is an experiment I wont be repeating again.


Another way to entice entrants is to have tournaments divided into over 1600(or1700) sections and under 1600(or1700)instead of opens.
Some of the tournaments do offer this. Gold Coast open being one of them.



In the recent Nell Van De Graaf Classic I played Solo who is a few hundred points higher than me and beat me easily and 5 guys under 1400 all of which I easily outplayed in uninteresting games ,oh!? and just for the record I lost on time(AGAIN) to a 15 something when I had a completely won position. So,,,7 uncompetitive games,,,,,,,a lot of fun that was,,,,,,,,,NOT
Havent you heard before that to get 'competitive' games in a swiss, especially when you are a top seed, you have to perform well and win your games. Have a look at the difference in the standard of your opposition compared to Moulthun's. He won every game and so played the toughest opposition.

Regarding players supporting longer time controls and more chess in tournaments, the reality of the disastrous 2005 qld reserve championship proves this not to be the case. We offered seven rounds of 80/60 over two days to the players in the reserves field. While the entry fee was higher than normal, most players I expected to play who didnt said when asked that they couldnt commit to two long time control weekends in a row.

Now it would be almost impossible to run a weekender with decent amount of entries at a time control of 90/30 or 80/60 and have players regularly coming back.

cafman
26-09-2005, 12:14 PM
Thank you whitey for your support but if the begrudgers would kindly just identify themselves to me whenever I meet them over the board I will let my pieces do the talking!! (assuming of course that I don't lose on time ;) )

four four two
26-09-2005, 12:18 PM
What do you consider to be a decent amount of entries GGray?

WhiteElephant
26-09-2005, 12:20 PM
Thank you whitey for your support but if the begrudgers would kindly just identify themselves to me whenever I meet them over the board I will let my pieces do the talking!! (assuming of course that I don't lose on time ;) )

Hehe one person I've always wanted to meet over the board is gray. That guy is getting a major spanking for divulging my private messages and getting me banned.

four four two
26-09-2005, 12:21 PM
Cafman,every state has a different culture in regards to times, in victoria most people would consider a 60 minute time control for a rated game to be just too fast. ;)

Garvinator
26-09-2005, 12:25 PM
Thank you whitey for your support but if the begrudgers would kindly just identify themselves to me whenever I meet them over the board I will let my pieces do the talking!! (assuming of course that I don't lose on time ;) )
you dont have to worry about that with me :whistle:

cafman
26-09-2005, 12:37 PM
I sympathize with organisers not getting big enough entries for tournaments. The QLD champs with a nice bunch of people around the same rating, excellent venue,,great time controls, generous prize money and fighting chess was one of the most enjoyable tournaments I've played in (despite my mediocre showing) yet it was poorly supported. The Ruth Coxhill Memorial, one of Australia's relatively few FIDE rated tournaments was also poorly attended. I havent been here long enough to know the reasons for this but at a guess I think that many adults have stopped playing chess because of the predominance of children at tournaments and the fact that they seldom get to play opponents of their own rating or standard. Probably, this situation has existed for so long here now that it would be impossible to reverse it unless we get an Aussie world champion or Russel Crowe makes a movie about chess. In Ireland our weekenders start on a friday night, are six rounds long and are usually divided into sections of 1900(or 2000 as in the case of Kilkenny and Bunratty)+....16-1900,,and beginner to 1600,,,,,,,,,,usual time control is 105 0r 120 minutes for all moves, there is no problem attracting entries and many GMs such as Timman, Tiviakov, Mc Shane, Hebden, Nunn, King, Conquest , Lalic, are frequent visitors to weekend tournaments. Admittedly a big part of the reason for this is that the tournaments are usually held in hotels so are also social events and the Guinness flows until the early hours but this is something that is hardly possible when games are finishing at 5pm like here. Most chess players want good chess tough games against similarly rated opponents and a bit of fun at a weekender not 6 quick games against 13 year olds one against an I.M and bed by 7pm!!

four four two
26-09-2005, 12:58 PM
Maybe those juniors need some Guinness, ;) , unfortunately on the goldcoast it seems that juniors are the only priority, some people seem to think adults are either has beens or not worth the effort. :(

cafman
26-09-2005, 01:04 PM
A recent "adults only" tournament at Gardinerchess only attracted about 20 competitors, Perhaps it's just that the good weather here isn't condusive to a strong chess culture. Hopefully when all the kids who are learning to play grow up things will be different. Perhaps by then, with global warming, it will be too hot to go out!!

pballard
26-09-2005, 01:23 PM
I haven't much to add except that I sympathise with cafman. I too think 60 + 10sec/move is too short for a proper rated game. But I have always done better at slow time limits so there's some self interest there! Adelaide does 60 + 30sec/move for interclub (and tournaments too usually) and I think that works well - it's roughly equivalent to the old 40/90.

I agree that you might have in reality dropped in strength after a 3 year layoff. I had a 6 year break until 2003, and I certainly found it was a while before I was anywhere near my old strength.

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 01:34 PM
Thank you whitey for your support but if the begrudgers would kindly just identify themselves to me whenever I meet them over the board I will let my pieces do the talking!! (assuming of course that I don't lose on time ;) )

I'm not a begrudger and resent being labelled a pedant for pointing out some one flaw with the evidence you were supplying to support you case. I prefer 40 in 90 and rest in 30 as a time control and play in club events regularly to enjoy playing chess at this time control. However, weekenders are weekenders and as Ian Rout has said many times, they are the equivalent of a fun run. Personally I would have a higher standard rating if 60+10 games were rated as rapid but then very few games would be rated as a part of the 'standard' rating list. So I think 60+10 is a necessary evil of the format. The culture is obviously different here and perhaps even moreso in Qld. My advice is to accept 60+10 play in weekenders and try to enjoy your chess or not.

BTW I don't know if you were implying that because you are a stronger chess player than the average that that makes your opinion any more right. I'm happy to identify myself (although I am not sure who it is I'm talking to) but if you think beating me at chess will prove anything then you probably have personality problems and should seek medical help.

four four two
26-09-2005, 01:50 PM
His comment about beating people at chess was said in jest,RW. :rolleyes:

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 02:01 PM
His comment about beating people at chess was said in jest,RW. :rolleyes:

Yeah, right. And I am qualified to give psychological diagnoses. :rolleyes:

Libby
26-09-2005, 02:12 PM
Maybe those juniors need some Guinness, ;) , unfortunately on the goldcoast it seems that juniors are the only priority, some people seem to think adults are either has beens or not worth the effort. :(

Really? And whose problem is that then?

Junior chess has two factions in their camp - business owners who rely on a junior clientele (actually, their parents) for the $$$s and parents themselves who offer their time and efforts to voluntarily run competitions and development activities.

If adults would like more things to happen for them they could always try getting off their backsides and organising something.

I'm not having a go at those who do, rather those who whine about what is not being done to develop their game, run tournaments, provide coaching & opportunities etc.

We just had a coaching weekend in Canberra with Ian Rogers, Javier Gil and others for almost 50 of our developing kids. Quite properly, the ACTJCL organised, subsidised & ran the weekend. That involved identifying the participants, orgainising the coaches, organising the venue, catering, equipment etc, determining the cost per participant and arriving at an appropriate level of subsidy from our funds.

Why can't a bunch of adults organise something like that if that's what they want? Why can't they run an event on their terms if that's what they want?

If there are problems for adults in Australian chess because of too much (perceived) focus on juniors - why can't the adults who run the thing do something about it? Why on earth are we blaming the kids?

It's your game. You want something, try doing something.

cafman
26-09-2005, 02:17 PM
Thank you 442,,,of course i was not implying that a higher rated person's comments are more valid ,I was merely replying to the claim that I was being picked on in some way. As for my 'pedant' jibe all I have to say is "If the cap fits , then wear it" Chess is full of people who prefer bickering and politics to the actual game itself and in my experience many of these people end up actually running the game to the detriment of people like me who simply want to play as much competitive chess as possible and to spend the maximum amount of time at the board. There are also MANY MANY brilliant organisers who do what they do for the love of chess and without them we'd have no competitions at all. I am reminded of my favourite quote "A camel is a horse designed by a committee"

Kevin Bonham
26-09-2005, 02:27 PM
What do people think about a time control like G40/+30? I recall that when sub-60 time controls were first allowed on the main list there were a few tournaments using them but these seem to have more or less died out in favour of G60/+10s.

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 02:31 PM
Thank you 442,,,of course i was not implying that a higher rated person's comments are more valid ,I was merely replying to the claim that I was being picked on in some way. As for my 'pedant' jibe all I have to say is "If the cap fits , then wear it" Chess is full of people who prefer bickering and politics to the actual game itself and in my experience many of these people end up actually running the game to the detriment of people like me who simply want to play as much competitive chess as possible and to spend the maximum amount of time at the board. There are also MANY MANY brilliant organisers who do what they do for the love of chess and without them we'd have no competitions at all. I am reminded of my favourite quote "A camel is a horse designed by a committee"

Actually cafman (as Libby points out) there are whingers and doers. Which are you?

cafman
26-09-2005, 02:42 PM
I successfully organised an 8 player round robin for 2000+ rated players for a number of years and now I am currently working as a chess coach. I also play in tournaments whenever possible and expect to play about 100 rated games this year so I suppose Im a doer ,,,,,,,,,,that's not to say I don't enjoy a good whinge too!! What do you do Rincewind?? (when not being a pain in the butt)
P.S Being a patient in a mental asylum does NOT qualify you to psychoanalyze others

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 02:46 PM
I successfully organised an 8 player round robin for 2000+ rated players for a number of years and now I am currently working as a chess coach. I also play in tournaments whenever possible and expect to play about 100 rated games this year so I suppose Im a doer ,,,,,,,,,,that's not to say I don't enjoy a good whinge too!! What do you do Rincewind?? (when not being a pain in the butt)
Try organising some of these long time control weekenders you are proposing and prove your point. The irony is I'm likely to play in them. Provided you weren't arbiting as well.

P.S Being a patient in a mental asylum does NOT qualify you to psychoanalyze others
And having a rating over 2000 does not give you license to be an arrogant SOB.

pballard
26-09-2005, 02:46 PM
What do people think about a time control like G40/+30? I recall that when sub-60 time controls were first allowed on the main list there were a few tournaments using them but these seem to have more or less died out in favour of G60/+10s.

My gut feel (without ever having played it) is it is the worst of both worlds. Too short for a decent length game (so for a one-game-a-night situation, like interclub, you'd want a bit more). But the 30 second increment makes it unsuitable for a rapid tournament when you're trying to get through several rounds a day, because a long game can stretch out a really long time (one minute per move, that means everyone could be sitting around for an hour or more waiting for a long ending to finish).

I don't like 60 + 10s/move for a rated game, but for rapid I like 10s/move MUCH more than a guillotine finish. I've seen far too many games won by a player shuffling his pieces in a lost or drawn position.

cafman
26-09-2005, 02:51 PM
OOOOOOOOO have I touched a nerve then? You'll be glad to know that since coming to Oz my rating has dropped by over 200 points,,,,,,,,,,the bad news is ...I'm still an arrogant SOB,,,,,,,,,,better that than a pedantic pratt.....Im still waiting to hear what you do...or are you solely a whinger?

pax
26-09-2005, 02:51 PM
What do people think about a time control like G40/+30? I recall that when sub-60 time controls were first allowed on the main list there were a few tournaments using them but these seem to have more or less died out in favour of G60/+10s.

Not a big fan, I must say. At 40/30 you need to play 40 moves minimum to get up to the 60 minutes minimum time you would have at 60/10.

antichrist
26-09-2005, 02:52 PM
Try organising some of these long time control weekenders you are proposing and prove your point. The irony is I'm likely to play in them. Provided you weren't arbiting as well.

And having a rating over 2000 does not give you license to be an arrogant SOB.

But being admin does of course, ...get your chicks for free

four four two
26-09-2005, 02:55 PM
All chess players,whether they are organisers,juniors, or adults are entitled to voice their opinion about how tournaments are run. This doesnt by definition make them a whinger,Cafman was entitled to voice his opinion about the time control being so short.Seeing as the tournament he was playing in wasnt a junior tournament he had every right to QUESTION whether the time control being used was for the benefit of juniors,in that there was an early finish and no night games. :whistle:

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 03:00 PM
OOOOOOOOO have I touched a nerve then? You'll be glad to know that since coming to Oz my rating has dropped by over 200 points,,,,,,,,,,the bad news is ...I'm still an arrogant SOB,,,,,,,,,,better that than a pedantic pratt.....Im still waiting to hear what you do...or are you solely a whinger?

You are so not worth the effort cafman.

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 03:02 PM
All chess players,whether they are organisers,juniors, or adults are entitled to voice their opinion about how tournaments are run. This doesnt by definition make them a whinger,Cafman was entitled to voice his opinion about the time control being so short.Seeing as the tournament he was playing in wasnt a junior tournament he had every right to QUESTION whether the time control being used was for the benefit of juniors,in that there was an early finish and no night games. :whistle:

I agree 442. And I atually agree with cafman's sentiment. It was the way that he can't take criticism of his argument that irked me.

cafman
26-09-2005, 03:10 PM
Hey!?! I never got any free chicks when I organised a tournament,,,,,..grrr
In reply to Inchmind......I dont like running tournaments unless I can play in them so I wont be organising any weekenders. Im surprised that my simple suggestion to have longer time limits and to have restricted events instead of opens has incurred such wrath. I have often spent an hour on a single move in a tournament but before playing here had hardly ever lost a game on time. Surely the fact that I could drop from having a rating of over 2000 for twenty something years to 1763 (or whatever I am now ) in the space of 3months proves just what a lottery 60mins +10 is. All I'm advocating is giving players enough time to play a decent game of chess.

Libby
26-09-2005, 03:22 PM
All chess players,whether they are organisers,juniors, or adults are entitled to voice their opinion about how tournaments are run. This doesnt by definition make them a whinger,Cafman was entitled to voice his opinion about the time control being so short.Seeing as the tournament he was playing in wasnt a junior tournament he had every right to QUESTION whether the time control being used was for the benefit of juniors,in that there was an early finish and no night games. :whistle:

Absolutely. No problem with the right to question. Just wondering where your response sits -


Originally Posted by four four two
Maybe those juniors need some Guinness, , unfortunately on the goldcoast it seems that juniors are the only priority, some people seem to think adults are either has beens or not worth the effort.

Again, what is so special about chess? In almost any sport money can be squeezed from juniors (parents) and parents are in there running the sausage sizzles, coaching teams, being Treasurers etc. Adults run their own competitions because they are adults and they can. They decide to play seriously or socially. They decide if they want to bother with training or just turn up on match day. At the top they get half decent coaches, spectators, facilities and sponsors. If you're Mr or Mrs Average social player you don't get all those things unless you have a motivated team or committee that works to provide them.

If a chess event is run with "unfiriendly" (for juniors) time controls, I guess it will be up to those grown-ups to make their event viable without the kiddy-lids presence. Viable in numbers and viable in financial terms. And if that can be done - what's stopping you or anyone else doing it?

I am only taking issue with blaming the kids for the (perceived) ills of chess. The kids aren't running anything, nor are their mothers, not even in the ACT :rolleyes:

shaun
26-09-2005, 03:24 PM
To have my say on various things in this thread ....

A) The ANU Open ran as a 40m+30s inc event. It wasn't that well recieved. The major criticism was that if you were running late for the start of the round you were far more heavility penalised under this format. And that you weren't allowed to spend as much time on the opening/early middlegame as you would like. The experiment wasn't repeated.

B) Lee Forace summed up most of the issues concerning 60m+10s a move quite well. The historical background I would like to add was that 60+10s only became popular in the late 80's. Part of this came about when I played at an Albury Open and Darryl Johansen gave a winners speech in which he commented negatively on the 5 round format. Deciding to see if the shorter time controls/more rounds would attract more players I organised a few events in Canberra, and made sure that tournaments using this time control (G/60 in the pre DGT days) could be included in the Grand Prix. They seemed well recieved and consequently became the de-facto format for most 6/7 round weekenders. Having said all that I believe linger time controls produce a much higher standard of chess (and I even think that 30s increment is too short).

C) A question for Cafman: You say you rating dropped a large number of points when you came to Australia. Does this mean that your ACF rating is much lower than your FIDE rating? or your FIDE rating dropped? or that you used to have an ACF rating and it dropped when you started playing again?

D) I'm assuming that all those people who didn't answer your question weren't doing so because they either didn't like you or had a vested interest in the status quo. I'm guessing most have participated in these debates before and were hoping that others might carry the burden of explanation instead. Of course they could have kept quiet rather than accuse you of being a self-interested whinger.

E) And a request. I'm interested in organising a tournament that will attract Timman, Nunn, Tiviakov, Baburin etc. Can you give me some tips on how to attract them to the Canberra weekenders I am involved in?

arosar
26-09-2005, 03:27 PM
E) And a request. I'm interested in organising a tournament that will attract Timman, Nunn, Tiviakov, Baburin etc. Can you give me some tips on how to attract them to the Canberra weekenders I am involved in?

How about a guided tour of the War Memorial?

AR

antichrist
26-09-2005, 03:29 PM
Absolutely. No problem with the right to question. Just wondering where your response sits -



Again, what is so special about chess? In almost any sport money can be squeezed from juniors (parents) and parents are in there running the sausage sizzles, coaching teams, being Treasurers etc. Adults run their own competitions because they are adults and they can. They decide to play seriously or socially. They decide if they want to bother with training or just turn up on match day. At the top they get half decent coaches, spectators, facilities and sponsors. If you're Mr or Mrs Average social player you don't get all those things unless you have a motivated team or committee that works to provide them.

If a chess event is run with "unfiriendly" (for juniors) time controls, I guess it will be up to those grown-ups to make their event viable without the kiddy-lids presence. Viable in numbers and viable in financial terms. And if that can be done - what's stopping you or anyone else doing it?

I am only taking issue with blaming the kids for the (perceived) ills of chess. The kids aren't running anything, nor are their mothers, not even in the ACT :rolleyes:

Well the GC banned the kids for one comp recently and got about one man, his dog and camel. But that is a youth oriented club. But it had the increment time which kept me away. Do you think Cafman that, like myself, you just don't like increment time after each move?

PHAT
26-09-2005, 03:35 PM
E) And a request. I'm interested in organising a tournament that will attract Timman, Nunn, Tiviakov, Baburin etc. Can you give me some tips on how to attract them to the Canberra weekenders I am involved in?

Sirens on a bed of ca$h.

arosar
26-09-2005, 03:42 PM
What do people think about a time control like G40/+30? I recall that when sub-60 time controls were first allowed on the main list there were a few tournaments using them but these seem to have more or less died out in favour of G60/+10s.

I first played in a G30/+30 at the Gold Coast Open in 2001. My impression then was that it was a bit too fast. And certainly, I think Dr Z, arbiter of said event, made a comment in the ACF newsletter saying that he believed that G40/+30 was superior. I think this and a G60/+10 are adequate for a weekender.

AR

bergil
26-09-2005, 03:42 PM
Sirens on a bed of ca$h.
:idea: :banana: :evilb: :banana:

cafman
26-09-2005, 03:51 PM
To have my say on various things in this thread ....

A) The ANU Open ran as a 40m+30s inc event. It wasn't that well recieved. The major criticism was that if you were running late for the start of the round you were far more heavility penalised under this format. And that you weren't allowed to spend as much time on the opening/early middlegame as you would like. The experiment wasn't repeated.

B) Lee Forace summed up most of the issues concerning 60m+10s a move quite well. The historical background I would like to add was that 60+10s only became popular in the late 80's. Part of this came about when I played at an Albury Open and Darryl Johansen gave a winners speech in which he commented negatively on the 5 round format. Deciding to see if the shorter time controls/more rounds would attract more players I organised a few events in Canberra, and made sure that tournaments using this time control (G/60 in the pre DGT days) could be included in the Grand Prix. They seemed well recieved and consequently became the de-facto format for most 6/7 round weekenders. Having said all that I believe linger time controls produce a much higher standard of chess (and I even think that 30s increment is too short).

C) A question for Cafman: You say you rating dropped a large number of points when you came to Australia. Does this mean that your ACF rating is much lower than your FIDE rating? or your FIDE rating dropped? or that you used to have an ACF rating and it dropped when you started playing again?

D) I'm assuming that all those people who didn't answer your question weren't doing so because they either didn't like you or had a vested interest in the status quo. I'm guessing most have participated in these debates before and were hoping that others might carry the burden of explanation instead. Of course they could have kept quiet rather than accuse you of being a self-interested whinger.

E) And a request. I'm interested in organising a tournament that will attract Timman, Nunn, Tiviakov, Baburin etc. Can you give me some tips on how to attract them to the Canberra weekenders I am involved in?
My ACF rating is currently 1763 compared to a FIDE 2111 although that has dropped a bit too because I didn't play at all for two years until february 2005 and Im still not back to the standard I was at. My Irish rating was 2008 when I started playing here in June/July,,,that has dropped to a 25 year low of 1872 because Ive been getting my results here rated. Ive lost very few games to non titled players here except through losing on time or blundering while playing on my incriment usually in won positions. I find that I end up playing every stage of the game superficially because there just isnt enough time to remember the opening,,,analyse variations in the middle game,,or even move my pieces by the time I reach an ending. It's just not real chess as far as Im concerned. Having said all that,,,Australian players are grossly underrated compared to their European counterparts. Ive played a number of guys here with 16- 1700 ratings who would be more like 18-1900 in europe and even a lot of the kids rated under 1400 can play a decent game.
As for attracting foreign Ims and Gms to weekenders........I think Australia is too far away from anywhere for this to happen but decent sponsorship/conditions goes a long way to help. Also, tournaments like Kilkenny and Bunratty In Ireland have built a reputation as being hospitable and having what we call "the craic",,,,,,,(translated means lots of booze and partying) The games usually finish at about 10 pm(or later on the friday) then it's everyone into the bar until the early hours. Players bring wives and girlfriends along too so even though the chess is deadly serious and of a pretty high standard everyone has a good weekend regardless of results. Another carrot for the good players is that the tournaments are restricted to over 2000 rating in the top sections.....guess I wont qualify any more :( although i think that once I get back to playing in some tournaments like the one currently in the Isle of Man I will recoup my rating quickly enough. I was going to play in Queenstown in january but the fact that it's an open is offputting.

Libby
26-09-2005, 04:00 PM
It wasn't that well recieved. The major criticism was that if you were running late for the start of the round you were far more heavility penalised under this format.

And this is a bad thing because ...? Oops, sorry, this is chess. I forget sometimes and imagine I am at other sports where they actually practice starting on time. :cheeky:

(although not Magic tournaments. Experienced my first on the weekend and they were very slow getting underway. Now I know where the U30 chess market has drifted to ...)

cafman
26-09-2005, 04:02 PM
Mincemind seems to have disappeared........must be feeding time at the zoo!
I miss him though :( sob,,sob

cafman
26-09-2005, 04:09 PM
Well the GC banned the kids for one comp recently and got about one man, his dog and camel. But that is a youth oriented club. But it had the increment time which kept me away. Do you think Cafman that, like myself, you just don't like increment time after each move?
I quite like .the increment idea as long as the total time for a game is sufficient,ten seconds is barely enough time to move a piece never mind have to think about where to put it.

cafman
26-09-2005, 04:13 PM
[QUOTE=antichrist]Well the GC banned the kids for one comp recently and got about one man, his dog and camel.
Hey!? I lost to that camel (on time of course) :evil:

antichrist
26-09-2005, 04:22 PM
I quite like .the increment idea as long as the total time for a game is sufficient,ten seconds is barely enough time to move a piece never mind have to think about where to put it.

Well a previous one they put on at GC, two beginners did not know how to endgame, so they played forever on that 10s increment and was so boring not worth watching. Never again for me - I was stretching my patience even going there to time increment in the first place.

four four two
26-09-2005, 04:27 PM
Let me make this crystal clear, Libby,I am not blaming the juniors.

I am however pointing out that Cafman has the right to criticise a time control ,which he seems to feel is being used simply because many juniors are in the tournament. :whistle:

shaun
26-09-2005, 04:29 PM
My ACF rating is currently 1763 compared to a FIDE 2111 although that has dropped a bit too because I didn't play at all for two years until february 2005 and Im still not back to the standard I was at. My Irish rating was 2008 when I started playing here in June/July,,,that has dropped to a 25 year low of 1872 because Ive been getting my results here rated.

I feel your pain. I too have an FIDE and ACF rating of about the same level (give or take a point), but I have an even more terrible story. On my honeymoon in 1996 I played a few rapidplay events in England. Now my ACF rating at the time was 1700 and I did well in a couple of tournaments. I even made it to the BCF Rapidplay Rating List. And I was shocked and dismayed to see that I was rated 165. Thats right, no misprint, 165. That is like a tenth of what my ACF Rating is. So disgusted was I at this massive underestimation of my strength that I have never played in another English chess tournament since.

four four two
26-09-2005, 04:33 PM
Well 165 might have been your "grading", Britain doesnt use a rating system like ours. :eh:

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 04:39 PM
Mincemind seems to have disappeared........must be feeding time at the zoo!
I miss him though :( sob,,sob

Delusions of adequacy as well. :hmm:

arosar
26-09-2005, 04:42 PM
Well 165 might have been your "grading", Britain doesnt use a rating system like ours. :eh:

:wall:

:lol:

AR

Libby
26-09-2005, 05:16 PM
Let me make this crystal clear, Libby,I am not blaming the juniors.

No, on reading correctly you were not blaming the juniors.

Only the system which gives them everything and consigns the poor old grown ups to the has-been pile.

And my suggestion is that there is nothing stopping the "has-beens" (real or perceived) making the effort to turn that around.

Using the Qld example, it has been suggested by others in the past that all the "good" administrators focus on juniors and leave the poor oldies floundering helplessly. Those administrators fall largely in the two categories I mentioned earlier. The paid up mob, who apportion their time & effort on business grounds because they rely on the best source of income for themselves (and that is not a criticism, it's a reality) and the parent brigade who have more interest in furthering opportunities for their children in chess than developing opportunities for their own peers.

And my solution is that people who see this bias in services, tournaments and opportunities should do something about it. They are adults, they do have a brain ( :hmm: ) and - if the amount of posting here is an indicator - they do have time on their hands.

bergil
26-09-2005, 05:31 PM
No, on reading correctly you were not blaming the juniors.

Only the system which gives them everything and consigns the poor old grown ups to the has-been pile.

And my suggestion is that there is nothing stopping the "has-beens" (real or perceived) making the effort to turn that around.

Using the Qld example, it has been suggested by others in the past that all the "good" administrators focus on juniors and leave the poor oldies floundering helplessly. Those administrators fall largely in the two categories I mentioned earlier. The paid up mob, who apportion their time & effort on business grounds because they rely on the best source of income for themselves (and that is not a criticism, it's a reality) and the parent brigade who have more interest in furthering opportunities for their children in chess than developing opportunities for their own peers.

And my solution is that people who see this bias in services, tournaments and opportunities should do something about it. They are adults, they do have a brain ( :hmm: ) and - if the amount of posting here is an indicator - they do have time on their hands.
Right on sister! :buttkick:

four four two
26-09-2005, 05:55 PM
Libby are you suggesting Cafman should be organising a tournament he intends on playing in? :hmm:

And as for you Arosar you couldnt even remember that Anand won the FIDE world title in 2000,and to think you are a "CLOSET GRANDMASTER".

:lol: :lol: :wall: :lol: :lol:

Libby
26-09-2005, 06:09 PM
Libby are you suggesting Cafman should be organising a tournament he intends on playing in? :hmm:

Actually it was a specific quote from you I addressed, not from Cafman. It was your observation on the focus of GC chess.

Would it be impossible to do this anyway? I'm still staggered by what people see as the involved nature of organising a tournament. (I'm not talking about the big ticket items, more the average weekend event). Sure enough, I deal with a different market but I'm running about 20 or more events with up to 160 players - who don't know what they're doing in many cases - and it's tiring, but it's not rocket science.

Don't you guys pay your DOPs etc for work on the day?

Are you finding it impossible for a group of like-minded adults to approach their club or association with a proposal to run an event or activity - specific to the perceived needs of neglected adults - then put together said event (advertising, venue, equipment etc) and pay a DOP to run it?

How helpless do you want to appear?

arosar
26-09-2005, 07:08 PM
And as for you Arosar you couldnt even remember that Anand won the FIDE world title in 2000,and to think you are a "CLOSET GRANDMASTER".

:lol: :lol: :wall: :lol: :lol:

Read the comments section. He's no World Champion.

AR

Thunderspirit
26-09-2005, 07:36 PM
Hehe one person I've always wanted to meet over the board is gray. That guy is getting a major spanking for divulging my private messages and getting me banned.

George trust me, don't bother. You're not missing much. Unless you want a lesson in how not to run an Australian Open, of which he is qualified....

Thunderspirit
26-09-2005, 07:39 PM
I feel your pain. I too have an FIDE and ACF rating of about the same level (give or take a point), but I have an even more terrible story. On my honeymoon in 1996 I played a few rapidplay events in England. Now my ACF rating at the time was 1700 and I did well in a couple of tournaments. I even made it to the BCF Rapidplay Rating List. And I was shocked and dismayed to see that I was rated 165. Thats right, no misprint, 165. That is like a tenth of what my ACF Rating is. So disgusted was I at this massive underestimation of my strength that I have never played in another English chess tournament since.

Shuan you of all people are aware of the BCF rating scale and the fact that is not aligned with FIDE. 150 =1800 FIDE and 200 is 2200. A rating of 165 is about right for you...

Bill Gletsos
26-09-2005, 07:41 PM
Shuan you of all people are aware of the BCF rating scale and the fact that is not aligned with FIDE. 150 =1800 FIDE and 200 is 2200. A rating of 165 is about right for you...Lee, I think Shaun is well aware of that. You appear to have dismissed the possibility that Shaun was being sarcastic.

Mischa
26-09-2005, 07:43 PM
[QUOTE=antichrist]Well the GC banned the kids for one comp recently and got about one man, his dog and camel.
Hey!? I lost to that camel (on time of course) :evil:

Hey Peter
we love that you love our country
We sympathise with your frustration
We admire your coaching of our juniors
could you just like us back a little?

Thunderspirit
26-09-2005, 08:04 PM
[QUOTE=cafman]

Hey Peter
we love that you love our country
We sympathise with your frustration
We admire your coaching of our juniors
could you just like us back a little?


Rowena, sadly there is not all that much to like about Australian chess. Peter asks a sesnsible question and 90% of the replies are garbage...(Not suggesting yours was...) He just needs to get it off his chest, and he'll be fine...

Libby
26-09-2005, 08:09 PM
[QUOTE=Mischa]


Rowena, sadly there is not all that much to like about Australian chess. Peter asks a sesnsible question and 90% of the replies are garbage...(Not suggesting yours was...) He just needs to get it off his chest, and he'll be fine...

:boohoo: It wasn't that bad was it? I thought Cafman came out swinging pretty hard himself at times.

Rincewind
26-09-2005, 08:21 PM
[QUOTE=Liberace]

:boohoo: It wasn't that bad was it? I thought Cafman came out swinging pretty hard himself at times.

I agree. He seems to have a problem dealing with people pointing out even factual errors in what he says. Even when the same people are symathetic with his general opinion. ;)

Garvinator
26-09-2005, 08:28 PM
George trust me, don't bother. You're not missing much. Unless you want a lesson in how not to run an Australian Open, of which he is qualified....
stick your opinion up your ass.

Mischa
26-09-2005, 08:30 PM
stick your opinion up your ass.

He has a donkey?

Kevin Bonham
26-09-2005, 11:04 PM
The major criticism was that if you were running late for the start of the round you were far more heavility penalised under this format.

This strikes me as an extremely weak excuse. People just shouldn't run late for the starts of rounds unless there are very unusual circumstances.


And that you weren't allowed to spend as much time on the opening/early middlegame as you would like.

Yes, I remember that being an issue - it seems that people are willing to risk rushed endings that they might lose on time even from favourable positions over this.

four four two
27-09-2005, 01:40 AM
Arosar,you fool,they are playing for the FIDE world title in San Luis.This title was won by Anand in 2000,your comment in your blog about him ever becoming the world champion for a FIDE tournament is CLEARLY WRONG.While Anand isnt the current FIDE world champion,he has won that title thus making him a FIDE WORLD TITLE HOLDER! While I feel the knockout format to win the FIDE title is a dubious way to obtain the title,his title has the same name as Fischer's,Karpov's, and Kasparov's . :owned: :whistle:

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 07:59 AM
...his title has the same name as Fischer's,Karpov's, and Kasparov's . :owned: :whistle:

...and Khalifman and Ponomariov and Kazimdzhanov.

bergil
27-09-2005, 08:19 AM
...and Khalifman and Ponomariov and Kazimdzhanov.
I found a title in my weet-bix box but the claim date had expired :doh:

cafman
27-09-2005, 09:23 AM
I feel your pain. I too have an FIDE and ACF rating of about the same level (give or take a point), but I have an even more terrible story. On my honeymoon in 1996 I played a few rapidplay events in England. Now my ACF rating at the time was 1700 and I did well in a couple of tournaments. I even made it to the BCF Rapidplay Rating List. And I was shocked and dismayed to see that I was rated 165. Thats right, no misprint, 165. That is like a tenth of what my ACF Rating is. So disgusted was I at this massive underestimation of my strength that I have never played in another English chess tournament since.
To convert english rating of 165 to ELO the formula is multiply by 8 and add 600 so you actually were rated 1920 !!! Pity you missed playing there since

shaun
27-09-2005, 09:38 AM
To convert english rating of 165 to ELO the formula is multiply by 8 and add 600 so you actually were rated 1920 !!! Pity you missed playing there since

So what your telling me is that the number next to my name in Australia DOESN'T mean the same as the number next to my name in another country. First I've heard of it!

pax
27-09-2005, 09:39 AM
Shaun: I think fear your comedy is wasted on these muppets.

bergil
27-09-2005, 09:56 AM
Shaun: I think fear your comedy is wasted on these muppets.
Try being funny first and stop thinking of fear.

shaun
27-09-2005, 10:06 AM
Shaun: I fear your comedy is wasted on these muppets.
While I am being obtuse on a couple of issues, and have hooked a couple of fish I wasn't even looking for (Forace and 442), my intention wasn't to be pointlessly cruel.
What I was aiming for was to show that some evidence that Cafman was using to support his arguments was pretty weak, and to do so by getting Cafman to demonstrate this himself.
eg The example of the number of GM's in Irish v Australian weekenders is irrelevent to his argument about time controls (distance/sponsorship are far more important as he remarks).
The difference in his ACF Rating and his FIDE/Irish Rating have more to do with the "relative" differences between the systems overall, and to argue that an ACF Rating X should denote the same strength as a FIDE/Irish Rating X is as silly as me claiming a BCF Rating of 1800, and the notion of players being "underated" based on the ACF ratings is a non-sequitur.

Now to put my rod away.
Like some of the posters here I sympathise with the notion that 60+10s is unsuitable for high quality chess, although the arguments about affecting ratings is something I care far less about.
My preferred format/time limit for weekend events would be 6 rounds, with either a 40/90m followed by 30s a move, or a G/70+30s move. I would also like to see weekenders of this format broken up into Open/U2000/Under1600 sections as a matter of course. Of course this would neccesitate a Friday night round.
So why isn't this format in use. Simply because in Australia weekend events usually attract players from far greater distances than in Europe. So to get to the start of a tournament on a Friday night is almost impossible if you have to travel for more than 90 minutes.
Having said that I am sure some enterprising organiser can give it a go and report back about whether it was a sucess or not.

cafman
27-09-2005, 10:49 AM
So what your telling me is that the number next to my name in Australia DOESN'T mean the same as the number next to my name in another country. First I've heard of it!
England doesnt use ELO ratings like most other countries.Im not an expert on the subject but I did have an English rating once so I checked it up. Perhaps Rincewind or Bill gletlost will throw some more light on the subject as they seem to know EVERYTHING :wall:

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 10:52 AM
England doesnt use ELO ratings like most other countries.Im not an expert on the subject but I did have an English rating once so I checked it up. Perhaps Rincewind or Bill gletlost will throw some more light on the subject as they seem to know EVERYTHING :wall:

Not everything, but I recognise irony when I see it. ;)

cafman
27-09-2005, 10:55 AM
Not everything, but I recognise irony when I see it. ;)
You call that irony??

cafman
27-09-2005, 10:58 AM
[QUOTE=cafman]

Hey Peter
we love that you love our country
We sympathise with your frustration
We admire your coaching of our juniors
could you just like us back a little?
I have no problem with Australia or Aussies(rincewind and bill getlost being possible exceptions),,,,,,,,,except for Vegemite(yuck),,,,,,,,Silly time controls,,,,,,,,,,,,,big brother,,,,,,,,,,,,and the fact that you don't know what FOOTBALL is.

cafman
27-09-2005, 11:03 AM
.
My preferred format/time limit for weekend events would be 6 rounds, with either a 40/90m followed by 30s a move, or a G/70+30s move. I would also like to see weekenders of this format broken up into Open/U2000/Under1600 sections as a matter of course. Of course this would neccesitate a Friday night round.
So why isn't this format in use. Simply because in Australia weekend events usually attract players from far greater distances than in Europe. So to get to the start of a tournament on a Friday night is almost impossible if you have to travel for more than 90 minutes.
Having said that I am sure some enterprising organiser can give it a go and report back about whether it was a sucess or not.[/QUOTE]Haven't you heard of first round byes?
I agree with the time limits you propose and the tournament schedules and the rating bands but I think you are wrong about the ratings. I get my results rated in Ireland no matter what country I play in and feel that Australian ratings are out of sync purely because of the amount of games that are decided by time or time related blunders thus distorting everything.

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 11:08 AM
[QUOTE=Mischa]
I have no problem with Australia or Aussies(rincewind and bill getlost being possible exceptions),,,,,,,,,except for Vegemite(yuck),,,,,,,,Silly time controls,,,,,,,,,,,,,big brother,,,,,,,,,,,,and the fact that you don't know what FOOTBALL is.

...and anyone who has the audacity to question your obviously faultless opinion.

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 11:09 AM
You call that irony??

The irony was unquestionable. IMHO it was also pretty good sarcasm.

cafman
27-09-2005, 11:13 AM
[QUOTE=cafman]

...and anyone who has the audacity to question your obviously faultless opinion.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZ

four four two
27-09-2005, 11:26 AM
Hey Cafman,which football team do you follow? :hmm: There is a football[soccer] thread in non chess section. ;)

Ian Rout
27-09-2005, 11:58 AM
I agree with the time limits you propose and the tournament schedules and the rating bands but I think you are wrong about the ratings. I get my results rated in Ireland no matter what country I play in and feel that Australian ratings are out of sync purely because of the amount of games that are decided by time or time related blunders thus distorting everything.

I don't think this follows.

* There are winners and losers, 60/10 does not inherently shift the base.

* 60/10 differs massively from G60 because at 60/10 people are still playing chess. At G60 there are players who spend the last part of the game shuffling pieces to keep the game going until the flag drops and the previous part trying to manufacture positions where this is viable, whereas there are other people who think this is an idiotic way to run a lightning tournament and aren't especially motivated.

* 60/10 is only a portion of the total games played. For instance this year I have played seven games at 60/10 and over forty at 90/30.

shaun
27-09-2005, 12:16 PM
.
Haven't you heard of first round byes?
Sure. But if your travelling a significant distance to an event, you probably are keen to win some prizemoney to cover your expenses. Taking a half point bye is going to make it a little harder to do that. Nonetheless it is an obvious option to have available.


I agree with the time limits you propose and the tournament schedules and the rating bands but I think you are wrong about the ratings. I get my results rated in Ireland no matter what country I play in and feel that Australian ratings are out of sync purely because of the amount of games that are decided by time or time related blunders thus distorting everything.
You are aware that the ACF system isn't ELO but Glicko, aren't you. So this may account for some differences you percieve. But more importantly there is another trap that you (and many,many others) have fallen into. Numbers represent things, they aren't the things themselves. Whether I have the number 1750 or 3125890 next to my name on a rating list in no way represents my strength as a chess player, especially when taken in isolation. It is simply a numerical representation of how likely I am to beat other chess players on the rating list, based on my, and everyone elses result in previous rating periods. It does not reflect upon me as a person or indicate that some part of my chess knowledge was removed from my brain while I was sleeping.
And as a final observation: If my rating goes up does it prove I am getting better as a chessplayer? and if so can I accept that when my rating goes down it shows everyone else is getting better as chessplayers?

four four two
27-09-2005, 12:19 PM
Many victorians would struggle to perform at their rating with 60/10,its a time control which is very rarely used in this state. :whistle:

The fact is the shorter the time control,the more cheap tactics people can get away with,a weaker player has a better chance of knowing if a sac is unsound with a 75-90 time limit then with a 60/10 time limit. ;)

Thunderspirit
27-09-2005, 12:23 PM
While I am being obtuse on a couple of issues, and have hooked a couple of fish I wasn't even looking for (Forace and 442), my intention wasn't to be pointlessly cruel.
What I was aiming for was to show that some evidence that Cafman was using to support his arguments was pretty weak, and to do so by getting Cafman to demonstrate this himself.
eg The example of the number of GM's in Irish v Australian weekenders is irrelevent to his argument about time controls (distance/sponsorship are far more important as he remarks).
The difference in his ACF Rating and his FIDE/Irish Rating have more to do with the "relative" differences between the systems overall, and to argue that an ACF Rating X should denote the same strength as a FIDE/Irish Rating X is as silly as me claiming a BCF Rating of 1800, and the notion of players being "underated" based on the ACF ratings is a non-sequitur.

Now to put my rod away.
Like some of the posters here I sympathise with the notion that 60+10s is unsuitable for high quality chess, although the arguments about affecting ratings is something I care far less about.
My preferred format/time limit for weekend events would be 6 rounds, with either a 40/90m followed by 30s a move, or a G/70+30s move. I would also like to see weekenders of this format broken up into Open/U2000/Under1600 sections as a matter of course. Of course this would neccesitate a Friday night round.
So why isn't this format in use. Simply because in Australia weekend events usually attract players from far greater distances than in Europe. So to get to the start of a tournament on a Friday night is almost impossible if you have to travel for more than 90 minutes.
Having said that I am sure some enterprising organiser can give it a go and report back about whether it was a sucess or not.

I did make most of these points earlier on in this thread, as for missing your sense of humour, I admit I should have known better... ;)

four four two
27-09-2005, 12:26 PM
Do they have a sense of humour in the ACT? ;) Of course they do!,its called the Australian parliament. :P

PHAT
27-09-2005, 01:09 PM
Taking a half point bye is going to ...

There should be NO BYES, ever!. Who wants to travel half way across a continent to get 6 games instead of 7.

pax
27-09-2005, 01:54 PM
I get my results rated in Ireland no matter what country I play in ..

I am curious about this statement. Do you mean to say that your results in Australian tournaments somehow contribute to your Irish rating?? How does this work??

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:09 PM
Many victorians would struggle to perform at their rating with 60/10,its a time control which is very rarely used in this state. :whistle:

The fact is the shorter the time control,the more cheap tactics people can get away with,a weaker player has a better chance of knowing if a sac is unsound with a 75-90 time limit then with a 60/10 time limit. ;)
I agree completely. Sadly, the 60-10 is the norm here in QLD.
I never heard of Glitcko(or whatever it's called,,,maybe should be GLITCH ko) rating system,,,,how does it differ to ELO?
I think the rating discrepancy here is best demonstrated by the fact that many peoples acf rating is about 200 below their FIDE whereas in europe there is normally only about 100 points difference between a national and a FIDE rating.

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:14 PM
I am curious about this statement. Do you mean to say that your results in Australian tournaments somehow contribute to your Irish rating?? How does this work??
All my games abroad count towards my Irish rating once I inform the rating officer in advance that I'm playing in a tournament. One of the benefits of this is that it unifies different countries ratings if a number of players compete abroad. Points are effectively imported and exported between countries..........for example the Australian rating system has gained 200 points due to my demise and the Irish system has dropped by same(if that makes sense)

pax
27-09-2005, 02:20 PM
I think the rating discrepancy here is best demonstrated by the fact that many peoples acf rating is about 200 below their FIDE whereas in europe there is normally only about 100 points difference between a national and a FIDE rating.

The difference is nowhere near 200, except at the low end where FIDE ratings are hopelessly inaccurate anyway.

If you look at the Australian top 100, the difference is seldom more than about 100 points.

pax
27-09-2005, 02:23 PM
All my games abroad count towards my Irish rating once I inform the rating officer in advance that I'm playing in a tournament. One of the benefits of this is that it unifies different countries ratings if a number of players compete abroad. Points are effectively imported and exported between countries..........for example the Australian rating system has gained 200 points due to my demise and the Irish system has dropped by same(if that makes sense)

Weird. It kind of makes sense in Europe where there is plenty of overlap. It is presumably all but useless in Australia unless more than one player with an Irish player competes?

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:28 PM
The difference is nowhere near 200, except at the low end where FIDE ratings are hopelessly inaccurate anyway.

If you look at the Australian top 100, the difference is seldom more than about 100 points.
Thats because the top players play overseas.I just get my games rated so that they mean something to me. I don't consider non rated games as serious chess.

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:32 PM
Hey Cafman,which football team do you follow? :hmm: There is a football[soccer] thread in non chess section. ;)
Ive been a Chelsea fan since 1967 when they lost 2-1 to spurs in the FA cup final. The present team are amazing and will get even better
P.S I HATE man United (rincewind probably supports them,,many assholes do) ;)

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 02:46 PM
Ive been a Chelsea fan since 1967 when they lost 2-1 to spurs in the FA cup final. The present team are amazing and will get even better
P.S I HATE man United (rincewind probably supports them,,many assholes do) ;)

Actually of the English clubs, Chelsea is my favourite mainly due to the Italian connection. ;)

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:52 PM
Actually of the English clubs, Chelsea is my favourite mainly due to the Italian connection. ;)
Mio padre e Italiano, da Sora, Frosinone mais per me e difficle con parlare en Italiano. Incidentally,,,they dont have any Italian players since Saint Gianfranco went back to Cagliari(oops,,I forgot Cudicini)

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 02:55 PM
Mio padre e Italiano, da Sora, Frosinone mais per me e difficle con parlare en Italiano. Incidentally,,,they dont have any Italian players since Saint Gianfranco went back to Cagliari(oops,,I forgot Cudicini)

I was talking about in the heyday, when Chelsea weren't shite.

cafman
27-09-2005, 02:58 PM
Well knock me down with an Emu feather!! Who would have believed it?? the previously obnoxious Rincewind turns out to be a blue while bergil shows his true colours as a RED,,,,,,,,just goes to show you never can tell,,,,,,,,,,So Bergy(or should I call u fergie?) how do you condone the cheating antics of constant divers van Nistleroy and Ronaldo(He's had more dives than Greg Lugannis) and the fould mouthed guerrier like behaviour of thugs ROONEY and KEEne,,,,,,,,,,,,not forgetting the intimadatory fergien who must be the worst loser in sporting history.................

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:00 PM
I was talking about in the heyday, when Chelsea weren't shite.
Check out the league table sugarpie!! mwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa XXXXXXXXXXXX :whistle:

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:03 PM
So I guess you wont be getting up early tommorow to watch Man U vs Benfica then Cafman. ;) Then again you might just to see them possibly lose. :lol:

Rincewind
27-09-2005, 03:04 PM
Check out the league table sugarpie!! mwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa XXXXXXXXXXXX :whistle:

Hey if they win the League, I'll even fix up the grammatical errors in your italiano. ;)

Ian Rout
27-09-2005, 03:04 PM
I never heard of Glitcko(or whatever it's called,,,maybe should be GLITCH ko) rating system,,,,how does it differ to ELO?


Here is some stuff about Glicko from the horse's mouth

http://math.bu.edu/people/mg/ratings.html

There are also separate threads about the merits or otherwise of the system that you might want to peruse or participate in.

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:06 PM
So it is true,we are using a crazy american system! :rolleyes:

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:07 PM
So I guess you wont be getting up early tommorow to watch Man U vs Benfica then Cafman. ;) Then again you might just to see them possibly lose. :lol:
I'll be watching Viva Benfica!! and on thursday when chelsea show Liverpool who should be euro champs,,,who do you support?What do you think of the A league? hasnt been bad so far but could do with a few more goals! I like the mariners.

bergil
27-09-2005, 03:09 PM
Silly time controls is now Football slanging, Chelsea has spent a billion quid on players so lets hope they can win the prem league more than once every 50 years :owned:

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:10 PM
Hey if they win the League, I'll even fix up the grammatical errors in your italiano. ;)
I know my italian is bad,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I accidentally told a very tasty looking signorina once that she had a face like a house which wasn't the message I was trying to get across at all................Another day I invited her to come to a casino with me,,,,,little realising that that means a brothel in italian :doh: I've stuck to english ever since.

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:10 PM
The A -league doesnt have enough teams,thats cause the admins stuffed up the tv deal. :(

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:14 PM
Silly time controls is now Football slanging, Chelsea has spent a billion quid on players so lets hope they can win the prem league more than once every 50 years :owned:
Man U have been the richest club in the world for decades able to buy all the best players like robson,ince, keene, etc etcyet it took them something like 27 years to win the league,,,,,,,,,,and that was only because no referee was ever brave enough to give a decision against them at old trafford,,,,,,,,,,,,it was even a fluke that they beat bayern munich,,,,,,,they only had two shots in the entire game and they came in extra time. Mourinho has proved he's a winner anywhere and the team spirit and organization he's instilled can't be bought.

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:18 PM
So it is true,we are using a crazy american system! :rolleyes:
Doesn't surprise me........I think John Howard sold Australia to Bush ages ago, they are just waiting for the next hurricane to bring, Texas, to NSW

rob
27-09-2005, 03:19 PM
The difference is nowhere near 200, except at the low end where FIDE ratings are hopelessly inaccurate anyway.

Hi Jon, How about one of your former competitors in WA: Peter Roza (FIDE) 2125 (ACF) 1894.

bergil
27-09-2005, 03:19 PM
Man U have been the richest club in the world for decades able to buy all the best players like robson,ince, keene, etc etcyet it took them something like 27 years to win the league,,,,,,,,,,and that was only because no referee was ever brave enough to give a decision against them at old trafford,,,,,,,,,,,,it was even a fluke that they beat bayern munich,,,,,,,they only had two shots in the entire game and they came in extra time. Mourinho has proved he's a winner anywhere and the team spirit and organization he's instilled can't be bought.
Man Utd
15 prem or Div 1 titles :clap: :owned:
11 FA Cups :clap: :owned:
2 European Champions league titles :clap: :owned:
1 European Cup winners title :clap:

and Chelsea?

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:20 PM
Casino means brothel in Italian? :D Well I guess they both involve a bit of gambling. ;)

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:23 PM
Man Utd
15 prem or Div 1 titles :clap: :owned:
11 FA Cups :clap: :owned:
2 European Champions league titles :clap: :owned:
1 European Cup winners title :clap:

and Chelsea?
ask me in 2015........................and we wont have to resort to mind games,,diving,,,,,,,,,,abusing officials,,,,,,,,,or bribing referees to do it :owned: Nor will we become a subsidiary of any yankee baseball(or american footie)team.

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:23 PM
I would like to just remind people there is a soccer thread in non-chess. ;)

bergil
27-09-2005, 03:29 PM
So I guess you wont be getting up early tommorow to watch Man U vs Benfica then Cafman. ;) Then again you might just to see them possibly lose. :lol:
Seen it already Man Utd 4 Benfica 1 great goal by Sir Bobby! :clap:

Chelsea
2 Prem or Div 1 titles :hmm: looks like another to come this year
3 FA Cups
0 European champions league titles :doh:
2 European Cup winners titles :clap:

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:29 PM
I would like to just remind people there is a soccer thread in non-chess. ;)
Im off to study My System for a few hours in the hope of learning something.I will entrust you to annoy Rincey in my absence

bergil
27-09-2005, 03:31 PM
I would like to just remind people there is a soccer thread in non-chess. ;)
Yeah where's a mod when you need him? spilt already!

four four two
27-09-2005, 03:36 PM
Bergil,most threads go off topic at some point in time. ;)

rob
27-09-2005, 03:36 PM
Silly time controls is now Football slanging, Chelsea has spent a billion quid on players so lets hope they can win the prem league more than once every 50 years :owned:
Many of the weekend time controls like 60+10 lead to Micky Mouse chess with heaps of mistakes, bad habits, rarely enough time to play endgames properly. I only play in some for social reasons. I'd advocate going with 5 rounds & slower times & if you expect large entries split into rating groups.

Bergil: Prem league has not been going 50 years. I've seen Chelsea live 3 times: Ipswich 6 Chelsea 2, Chelsea 0 Barnsley 3, then the last game of the following season again v Barnsley when Chelsea won promotion.

Cafman: its sunny in WA too and we have more English ppl here that know what real football is :)

bergil
27-09-2005, 03:44 PM
Bergil: Prem league has not been going 50 years. I've seen Chelsea live 3 times: Ipswich 6 Chelsea 2, Chelsea 0 Barnsley 3, then the last game of the following season again v Barnsley when Chelsea won promotion.

This I'm aware of as I posted the two clubs historys with Prem or Div 1 titles, the prem league started in 1992

But for the record
Man Utd Prem titles 8
Chelsea Prem titles 1

cafman
27-09-2005, 03:45 PM
Many of the weekend time controls like 60+10 lead to Micky Mouse chess with heaps of mistakes, bad habits, rarely enough time to play endgames properly. I only play in some for social reasons. I'd advocate going with 5 rounds & slower times & if you expect large entries split into rating groups.

Bergil: Prem league has not been going 50 years. I've seen Chelsea live 3 times: Ipswich 6 Chelsea 2, Chelsea 0 Barnsley 3, then the last game of the following season again v Barnsley when Chelsea won promotion.

Cafman: its sunny in WA too and we have more English ppl here that know what real football is :)
Your chess comments I agree with completely,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,please don't go to any more chelsea matches though.

Garvinator
27-09-2005, 05:48 PM
I agree completely. Sadly, the 60-10 is the norm here in QLD.

Ill challenge this statement, sorry cafman.

I am trying to think of the tournaments in qld that use this time control. The only ones I can think of so far are the Gold Coast Open, Caloundra Open, Nell Van Der Graff, first two rounds of the peninsula open and the redcliffe weekender. I think maybe the adults only weekender used it too.

This is compared to the Brisbane Open, City of Brisbane, CAQ weekend events (which there are a few), Queensland Championships, Qld Open, Ruth Coxhill Memorial and other various club events. Granted some of these are one night a week tournaments, but still to say that 60/10 is the norm here in qld is not quite accurate.

Bill Gletsos
27-09-2005, 06:22 PM
Ill challenge this statement, sorry cafman.

I am trying to think of the tournaments in qld that use this time control. The only ones I can think of so far are the Gold Coast Open, Caloundra Open, Nell Van Der Graff, first two rounds of the peninsula open and the redcliffe weekender. I think maybe the adults only weekender used it too.

This is compared to the Brisbane Open, City of Brisbane, CAQ weekend events (which there are a few), Queensland Championships, Qld Open, Ruth Coxhill Memorial and other various club events. Granted some of these are one night a week tournaments, but still to say that 60/10 is the norm here in qld is not quite accurate.Accuracy doesnt seem to be his forte. ;)

four four two
27-09-2005, 11:33 PM
I will think you will find Cafman was referring to weekenders. ;)

cafman
28-09-2005, 10:08 AM
Ill challenge this statement, sorry cafman.

I am trying to think of the tournaments in qld that use this time control. The only ones I can think of so far are the Gold Coast Open, Caloundra Open, Nell Van Der Graff, first two rounds of the peninsula open and the redcliffe weekender. I think maybe the adults only weekender used it too.

This is compared to the Brisbane Open, City of Brisbane, CAQ weekend events (which there are a few), Queensland Championships, Qld Open, Ruth Coxhill Memorial and other various club events. Granted some of these are one night a week tournaments, but still to say that 60/10 is the norm here in qld is not quite accurate.
Its the norm for weekenders. I know Coffs harbour isnt in QLd but that's coming up soon and they have it too and unless I'm mistaken so did Townsville. I think it's clear now from the majority of replies that most players would prefer a bit more time for games. Incidentally, Caloundra's idea of the ten seconds only clicking in after the hour was the worst ever,as you well remember I lost to an 1100 player on time because his time had elapsed and his clock showed a minus sign yet when mine ran out i got no second life. Games should be decided by chess moves not by new fangled clocks(easy know nutcase Fischer invented the stupid things) :wall:

pax
28-09-2005, 10:43 AM
Its the norm for weekenders. I know Coffs harbour isnt in QLd but that's coming up soon and they have it too and unless I'm mistaken so did Townsville. I think it's clear now from the majority of replies that most players would prefer a bit more time for games. Incidentally, Caloundra's idea of the ten seconds only clicking in after the hour was the worst ever,as you well remember I lost to an 1100 player on time because his time had elapsed and his clock showed a minus sign yet when mine ran out i got no second life. Games should be decided by chess moves not by new fangled clocks(easy know nutcase Fischer invented the stupid things) :wall:


Surely you would agree that 60/10 is better than G60? After all, the increment is designed so that games can *not* be decided on time. Admittedly they are, instead often decided by blunders in time trouble...

Rincewind
28-09-2005, 10:46 AM
Surely you would agree that 60/10 is better than G60? After all, the increment is designed so that games can *not* be decided on time. Admittedly they are, instead often decided by blunders in time trouble...

I think for increments from move 1 this is true G60+10/move is ar better than G60. However, the +10 seconds at the end is a very difficult time control to get used to and may lead to even MORE losses on time (at least initially).

cafman
28-09-2005, 10:47 AM
I don't think any rated game should be less than 90 mins per side minimum.As for incriments,,,,I'm not against them in principle but ten seconds is far too short,,,,,30 seconds at least is needed.

cafman
28-09-2005, 10:53 AM
Surely the whole reason we play chess is because we enjoy the game itself and the myriad of complications and problems it throws up. An hour or an hour and ten just simply isn't enough time to delve into the position sufficently deeply or to form and carry out correct plans. There is nothing more unsatisfactory than having to rush an intriguing position and it is extremely irritating to lose a game on time after completely outplaying an opponent.

Rincewind
28-09-2005, 11:02 AM
Surely the whole reason we play chess is because we enjoy the game itself and the myriad of complications and problems it throws up. An hour or an hour and ten just simply isn't enough time to delve into the position sufficently deeply or to form and carry out correct plans. There is nothing more unsatisfactory than having to rush an intriguing position and it is extremely irritating to lose a game on time after completely outplaying an opponent.

Have you heard the time is a resource argument? There seems to reason why the cutoff should be 60, 90, 120, etc. the 60 minute cutoff from rapid/standard is in line with the application of the rapid laws of chess and so makes sense. Different rules -> different rating list. However, the 90 is better than 60 is just your gut feel for how long you think you need to play "properly".

I've lost on time in 40 moves in 90 minutes periods so I sympathise with your sentiment. But if you want to have practically untimed games you could try correspondence. Or only play in tournaments offering G90+ time controls. Vote with your feet.

cafman
28-09-2005, 11:14 AM
Any chess is better than no chess. I started this debate because i wondered if most people like the 60 +10 time limit used in most weekenders or,like me, if they preferred longer. I think it's fair to say that most people would prefer a bit longer so perhaps tournament organisers should take note. I'm tired of squabbling with Rincewind and Bill Getlost so I'm outa here,,,,,,,,,,,,byeeeeeeeeeeeee
P.S You can bitch about me all you like now behind my back :wall:

Rincewind
28-09-2005, 11:17 AM
P.S You can bitch about me all you like now behind my back :wall:

Wait! You forgot to take your bat and ball.

bergil
28-09-2005, 04:41 PM
Wait! You forgot to take your bat and ball.
No he'll come back to complain about that too! :whistle:

Thunderspirit
28-09-2005, 05:59 PM
I can empathaise with the players here who like slower time limits with a decent incriment. I can also see the other side of the coin as well. There are players who like to be able to play 7 games over a weekend (and the travel that allows).

As someone who plays and does the a little bit of arbitering (not that a consider myself to be an arbiter.. ;) ) I have a differing opinion on time controls for the 'two hats' that I sometimes wear.

As a DOP, all incrimental time controls make our job a lot easier. I had an inncorrect claim once involving a game between two IM's, and so wasn't so keen to make a decision on two players who were... lets just say, a little better than me! ;) :owned: If the time control had +10 sec at least the game could have been decided by chess, and not the clock.

As a player I LOVE guillotine finishes. I have to be honest that I like them for all the wrong reasons. Like most players under a g/60 time control I have won games that I shouldn't have, and lost games from the other end. I spent most of teenage years getting burnt from my friends in ACT chess. I don't take it personally it's just the nature of the time control. If you don't like 60/10 then U don't have to play them. While weekenders at g/90 + 30 secs aren't all the common, if U are prepared to travel then U can find about 6 events per year that are this long. (Peter, you should play Doeberl Cup over Easter next year, that has a longer time limit, and it as strong as an weekender gets in Oz.)

60 mins (min) are to stay in Australian chess. While I would support a change to the mininum length for a rated game, (say to 4hrs...) I can't see it happening. One positive is that the rapid list would mean more and more importance. It would change the GP a lot too, as it would mean only a handful of events would be GP events, which is what happens in NZ. (Alternatively Malta's GP is rapid and blitz, so both are possible- though it's best just to have one GP)

Sadly g/60 is almost dead in Australia. Most weekender have DGT's, and though the St George Swiss which I suggested be g/60 have moved to g/60+10 as well... Dr Z, got want he wanted on that one...

Pick and choose... Play want you want, when U want. Australian chess will never be perfect and it is not possible to please everyone. But the more options then more potential to give players want they want....

PHAT
28-09-2005, 07:08 PM
Idea. NO TIME LIMITS.

A recommended duration of 60 minute on the clock. When that time runs out you opponent can start bagging you, "Come on dickhead," "Look, mate, your gone. Just resign."

Then at a total time elapsed of 1+1=2hours. The other players, officials and spectators can start booing and a slow hand clap the main over-timer until he resigns. Social peer preasure could be a fun part of any tournament.

Thunderspirit
28-09-2005, 07:24 PM
Idea. NO TIME LIMITS.

A recommended duration of 60 minute on the clock. When that time runs out you opponent can start bagging you, "Come on dickhead," "Look, mate, your gone. Just resign."

Then at a total time elapsed of 1+1=2hours. The other players, officials and spectators can start booing and a slow hand clap the main over-timer until he resigns. Social peer preasure could be a fun part of any tournament.

Matt, while some of my post was a little light hearted it was essentially a serious post. How can anyone take you seriously when you reply like that?? :doh:

pax
28-09-2005, 08:24 PM
Matt, while some of my post was a little light hearted it was essentially a serious post. How can anyone take you seriously when you reply like that?? :doh:

Lighten up man. I thought it was funny :D

ursogr8
28-09-2005, 08:35 PM
Lighten up man. I thought it was funny :D

Or even class it as funny and very clever ...given the thread title. ;)

antichrist
28-09-2005, 08:51 PM
........ Games should be decided by chess moves not by new fangled clocks(easy know nutcase Fischer invented the stupid things) :wall:

Hear hear, are today's players deficent in that they cannot play without increment?

four four two
28-09-2005, 10:50 PM
Increments reduce arguments amongst players and DOPs . :hand:

Garvinator
28-09-2005, 11:10 PM
Increments reduce arguments amongst players and DOPs . :hand:
and this is one of the best reasons for having increments :)

antichrist
29-09-2005, 09:11 PM
So increment is a cop out for avoiding excitement and tight situations - that is taking the fun out of chess. What do DOPs get paid (or unpaid for)?

What was better than the big crowd around a top table with someone in time trouble? Missing something under pressure with acompanying ooos and aaahs and the big post mortem afterwards led by end-master Lloyd Fell etc.

four four two
29-09-2005, 11:17 PM
Ah yes,but what about the higher rated player,who when the clock needs to be manually adjusted,"instructs" the arbiter and his lower rated opponent about what needs to be done? :hmm:

jase
29-09-2005, 11:43 PM
I confess I do miss the old guillotine finishes too, as a player, arbiter, and spectator. The introduction of Rule 10.2 (draw claims with less than 2 minutes on the clock) certainly created some headaches for arbiters, but notwithstanding that, sudden death finishes are the only moments where I am able to perceive chess as a sport.

Of course it can bit you in the ass, but that's the nature of the beast. About 15 years ago I was playing Nat Mills at the Albury Open, who at the time was dating my best friend.

I was an exchange up, good position, but with only a few minutes left to her 10 odd, I offered a draw. She looked at the clock and declined. I checked my attack and played a variation that forced her to either give up material or repeat moves.

She opted to repeat, I looked for a draw offer from her, got a steely stare in response, so sought out the arbiter (Gary Wastell, if I recall correctly) to claim my draw.

Whilst the draw by repitition was clear, I had stopped recording, and my claim was ruled invalid. I was additionally penalised 2 minutes for an incorrect draw claim, thus losing on time. Not happy, Jan. :doh:

antichrist
30-09-2005, 06:38 AM
Jase, that is a classic and is what chess is made of. All the stories add up to folklore and contribute to books like "The Complete Chess Addict" and "Traps, Pitfalls and Swindles".

You are correct in that those guillotine finishes were only time when chess is exciting as a sport. And as an arbiter you momentarily become one of the main actors - whether it be arguments with Johnny Bolens, Ilich(?) whatever they turn into memories for life.