PDA

View Full Version : Standard or Rapidplay?

Phil Bourke
19-01-2007, 11:50 AM
I wish to confirm if I am reading the Laws of Chess correctly.
If a tournament is conducted as a 30 mins + 30 secs increment per move, is it a rapidplay tournament or a standard?
I think the LoC determine it to be a Rapidplay, but you never can be sure :)
If I read the LoC correctly, a tournament of 30:30 + 30 secs increment per move would qualify as a Standard tournament.

antichrist
19-01-2007, 02:24 PM
I wish to confirm if I am reading the Laws of Chess correctly.
If a tournament is conducted as a 30 mins + 30 secs increment per move, is it a rapidplay tournament or a standard?
I think the LoC determine it to be a Rapidplay, but you never can be sure :)
If I read the LoC correctly, a tournament of 30:30 + 30 secs increment per move would qualify as a Standard tournament.

Is there such thing as a standard game, do you mean classic game?

Phil Bourke
19-01-2007, 02:52 PM
Is there such thing as a standard game, do you mean classic game?
I would never imagine myself playing a classic game :)
I am referring to the classification of the game, if it isn't lightning, if it isn't blitz, and it isn't rapidplay, and has enough time to grab a cup of coffee whilst playing, what is it called? I always thought that it was termed a standard game of chess. :) But hey, I have been wrong before :)

Kevin Bonham
19-01-2007, 03:13 PM
30/+30 is covered by Rapidplay laws as the time allotted + 60 times the increment is exactly 60 minutes ("from 15 to 60 minutes").

Like G60 flat it is odd in that it is covered by Rapidplay laws but rateable on the main ACF list. This creates an anomoly because technically players can claim the right not to score, unless the tournament conditions require them to.

It is strange that the Rapidplay laws are framed to include both end points, ie G15 flat is a rapid and G60 flat is a rapid. It would make more sense to me that one or the other not be.

Phil Bourke
19-01-2007, 03:28 PM
30/+30 is covered by Rapidplay laws as the time allotted + 60 times the increment is exactly 60 minutes ("from 15 to 60 minutes").
Thanks Kevin.
Now without stressing too much :) Would a 30:30/+30 then be a Standard game according to FIDE and as such, recording moves becomes mandatory.
Also interesting, a 30/30 could be/would be rated the same as a 90/30 by the ACF.
Thanks Phil

Kevin Bonham
19-01-2007, 05:08 PM
Thanks Kevin.
Now without stressing too much :) Would a 30:30/+30 then be a Standard game according to FIDE and as such, recording moves becomes mandatory.

Yes because then the time allotted + 60 times the increment is 60:30.

Also interesting, a 30/30 could be/would be rated the same as a 90/30 by the ACF.

Yes. It hasn't been a very popular option since becoming possible though. I know at least one rated event using 30/30 has been held but the perception was that it is pretty fast and 40/30 is a better equivalent to G60.

Rincewind
19-01-2007, 08:56 PM
Yes. It hasn't been a very popular option since becoming possible though. I know at least one rated event using 30/30 has been held but the perception was that it is pretty fast and 40/30 is a better equivalent to G60.

And fair enough too. Probably less than 20% of games going to 60+ moves. I think 40 would be a fairer way to compare increment time controls with guillotine. In which case 40+30 is just about right. ;)

Phil Bourke
20-01-2007, 06:04 PM
And fair enough too. Probably less than 20% of games going to 60+ moves. I think 40 would be a fairer way to compare increment time controls with guillotine. In which case 40+30 is just about right. ;)
From limited TD experience on a internet chess server, there was an equation that we used to determine how long a tournament would take to run.
2(Game Time+2/3*Increment)*Nr of Rounds.
To get a rough guide to the amount of time per player for these games, just use the Game Time + 2/3 Increment.
Hence 30/30 is approx 50 mins, 30/40 is approx 60 mins.
Which works in with your use of 40 moves per game as a fairer indication of converting to approximate game times.

Rincewind
21-01-2007, 10:22 AM
From limited TD experience on a internet chess server, there was an equation that we used to determine how long a tournament would take to run.
2(Game Time+2/3*Increment)*Nr of Rounds.
To get a rough guide to the amount of time per player for these games, just use the Game Time + 2/3 Increment.
Hence 30/30 is approx 50 mins, 30/40 is approx 60 mins.
Which works in with your use of 40 moves per game as a fairer indication of converting to approximate game times.

I've run some quick stats.

Of my 325 games I have on file, only 7.1% go to 60 moves or longer. However some may have gone that long and not been recorded due to being under 5 minutes in a guillotine finish.

In my database of 3M+ games around 8.5% go to 60 moves or more.

Phil Bourke
21-01-2007, 10:39 AM
In my database of 3M+ games around 8.5% go to 60 moves or more.
This would seem reasonable. My considerations would be that the time controls are relatively irrelevant in the early rounds when there may be greater disparity in the abilities of the combatants, but will probably become a large factor in the later rounds as that disparity is diminished and time management becomes a bigger factor in deciding the game/s.
But it still comes down to leaving enough time for the possibility of 10% of games going beyond the reasonably determined amount of time for a game without leaving that big a gap that everyone is complaining about waiting for the next round. :)
This is more evident in 90/30 tournaments, where some simple positions can take 90-100 moves before the players are satisfied that it is indeed drawn. It is frustrating for the remainder of the field to turn up in readiness for the next round to find two players still going from the previous round, and the arbiter patiently waiting for their result so as to be able to proceed with the tournament. :) Everyone wishes that the arbiter would declare the result of the game and get on with it. Unless of course, it is their game that he would be declaring. :)

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2007, 08:55 PM
This is more evident in 90/30 tournaments, where some simple positions can take 90-100 moves before the players are satisfied that it is indeed drawn.

Or before someone wins.

There's a perception that games going for a very long time are almost always draws. However, in the Fritz database, games going 100+ moves (which about 1 in 400 do) are split evenly between wins and draws. Even 120+ move games (about 1 in 3000) are still won 43% of the time. I myself won a rapid with increments (from a lost position) on move 114 recently.

antichrist
21-01-2007, 08:57 PM
Or before someone wins.

There's a perception that games going for a very long time are almost always draws. However, in the Fritz database, games going 100+ moves (which about 1 in 400 do) are split evenly between wins and draws. Even 120+ move games (about 1 in 3000) are still won 43% of the time. I myself won a rapid with increments (from a lost position) on move 114 recently.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Did you have all the hall waiting for you to finish?

Kevin Bonham
21-01-2007, 08:59 PM
You should be ashamed of yourself.

Did you have all the hall waiting for you to finish?

No as it was a club event without specific round times. Gory details on post 39 at http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=130848#post130848

Garvinator
22-01-2007, 04:07 PM
Can anyone explain why fide chose 60 moves as the number of moves to decide game times?

Games rarely go to 60 moves.