Tournament formulas


Tournament formulas

Back to forum

Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-12)
Tournament formulas

Hello to all.

What do you think about the idea to create a SLOW tournament category ? Clocks could be 60 days + 10 days / move or 100 days + 100 days / 10 moves (very slow) ?

Any idea or opinion ?

Dinesh De Silva    (2006-04-12 09:42:18)
Tournament formulas

I personally think such tournaments are too slow..... a real drag. 10 moves per 40 days seems exactly right for standard tournaments. Kind regards, Dinesh.

Patrice Verdier    (2006-04-12 09:47:09)
Tournaments formulas

I am agree with De Silva. I think that already tournaments are slow. 10 moves for 40 days or 30 days is a good formula. Perhaps it will be interesting to create blitz tournament for players who like this (example : 1 move by day) Also it will be interesting to create tournament with Cup System.

Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-12 09:53:48)
Rapid tournaments

Formula for rapid tournaments is 30 days (because players could be in vacation while the tournament starts) + 1 day / move

Marc Lacrosse    (2006-04-12 09:57:10)
Tournament formulas : not too many .

Personally I do prefer playing a small number of games simultaneously at a relatively rapid pace instead of a larger number at slower pace.

But I can understand that some prefer the opposite. So why not.

One caveat : I think you should wait a little bit before multiplying categories.
As long as we are not a larger number of active players there is a risk that there will be a small number of players waiting for long before a sufficient number of players will join for starting a tournament in a given category.


Henri Muller    (2006-04-16 18:11:51)
tournament formules

personnellement je préfère de loin 10 coups/40 jours. Ne changez rien, c'est parfait....sinon certaines parties (perdues ) "trainent" lamentablement !!

Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-16 18:33:01)

Déjà ? :)

So, about games "obviously lost" (somewhat subjective), the council may decide special rules so that referees can grant games that drag out. What do you think is best ? That's a recurrent problem in correspondence chess, and an original policy could make the rating more accurate, as some players may finish "good games" very faster than others... Quite subjective indeed, and not obvious. Where's the limit ? Maybe correspondence chess players should first accept this idea that their "won" games may finish much later...

Glen D. Shields    (2006-04-16 18:57:19)
60/10 Too Slow for Me

I'm in the group that thinks 60/10 is too slow. Like Mr. LaCrosse, I like fewer games at a faster pace. Only way 60/10 might work is to set a REASONABLE limit on days per move. ICCF's 40 days is too long and some TD's are much too lenient about extending it. I hope this doesn't hijack your thread Thibault, but The opposite question I'd like to ask is how many server players find the opening game too fast and like a blur? I make a move and there's a reply waiting 5 minutes later. It won't be long before someone writes a script and connects it to ChessBase to cut the time down to seconds :)

Dinesh De Silva    (2006-04-17 08:54:33)
About Glen's observations

Thibault, I think Glen has a point there. IF any players are using/might use such fraudulent script writing, a system can be found to detect it!?

Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-17 09:23:44)
Fraudulent ?

I'm not sure.. is really an "automatic player" fraudulent ? Many players are centaurs (human + computer). The decision to let an engine play would be a human one after all.. Anyway, a script player doesn't seem so easy to make. (and for what ?)

Dinesh De Silva    (2006-04-17 09:47:09)
Quite a good answer

Thibault, that was quite a good answer. We'll have to wait and see if there's any more thoughts on the subject by Glen.

Glen D. Shields    (2006-04-17 19:01:10)
Thanks for the Comments Guys

Dinesh - since computer use is allowed I have no problem if someone uses a "script" to automate moves. I don't think that would be fradulent. Actually I think it would be clever :) The point I was trying to ask is anyone concerned (besides me) that we created a chess medium (server chess) where it's so easy to make moves that the games move too fast? I dread the start of a new section, particularly large sections with 10+ players. It's impossible to keep one's inbox empty for even a minute. I know I should show more discipline and walk away, but it's almost like an illness "just one more move then I'll stop" and I don't! One practice I've been using lately is to make a move in a notebook and sit on the move for a day or two before sending it. That helps slow things down. I wonder if a delay send option on the server would make any sense? One could make a move and then click a delay send button for 24 or 48 hours. One would be charged time during the delay, but it would automate the slow down and make tournament startups a little less hectic. Maybe I'm the only one who sees this as an issue> If so, then label this just one crazy man's thoughts :)

Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-17 19:29:05)
True !

That's interesting and very true, Glen. I'll think about that ! Chess, more than email-checking, is a hard drug :)