Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. 25 Jul '03 19:55
    There have been many discussions about TO, wether to take it automatically or not, vacation settings, ethics, etc. Here is a proposal that I would like your opinion on. The player that thought of it has already gotten confirmation from Russ that, if there is enough interest from the RHP community, it could be implemented.

    Instead of a TO for the single next move, we would propose to come closer to real-life games (over the board), and have a TO based on a fixed number of moves. Examples: 5 moves in 7 days, or 20 moves in 30 days, all moves in one day, or something the like.

    We could have several variants (40 moves in 60 days would be a kind of long haul for instance). The current one-move TO would be a simple specific case of this solution (as you find in some types of blitz games as well).

    This could not only resolve the vacation problem and the many discussions about TO, but also, once entered into the system, all TO's could be automatic and without delay. One option for non-tournament and non-clan matches could be to have non-automatic TO.

    If the idea is found good, the next step could be to discuss about numbers: how many moves, in how many days. How many variants, etc...

    What do you think?

    Mephisto.
  2. Standard member SirLoseALot
    Shut Gorohoviy!
    26 Jul '03 04:43
    I have one question about this.Guess I don't understand it very well,but suppose we agree to play 5 moves in 7 days.My opponent doesn't move the first 6 days.Then do we have to make 4 moves the 7th day?If not,what will happen then?
  3. Standard member Nemesio
    Ursulakantor
    26 Jul '03 04:55
    This idea doesn't look so good. Let's say for example I am playing against another player with 20 move 30 day time out. Let's say we play like gangbusters the first day and make 25 moves. But, then I capture his queen in a clever fork. What incentive does he have to move and what recourse do I have if he stalls for 30 days? The current system is only in place for poor sports who want to prolong the obvious (running around with just a king, e.g.) or for people who join then stop playing. I have never had to time out a reasonable player and I often replay them.

    I try to give players the benefit of the doubt, but more than a few weeks over is tough nuts. I waited four months for a player who was on vacation! Most players I have played are considerate and don't want to up their own rating with cheap timeouts.
  4. 26 Jul '03 07:10
    Originally posted by SirLoseALot
    I have one question about this.Guess I don't understand it very well,but suppose we agree to play 5 moves in 7 days.My opponent doesn't move the first 6 days.Then do we have to make 4 moves the 7th day?If not,what will happen then?
    Perhaps I was not clear enough. The idea was that the system would keep track of and show to both players the elapsed time during wich each player has been 'on the move'. So 5 moves in 7 days, means 7 days 'on the move' for each player. Your move 'starts the clock' for the other player, just like in OTB. So when he doesn't move for 6 days, he has one more day (24 hours moving time) for the remaining 4 moves, and you still have 7 days.

    This is also what has been checked with Russ for feasability.

    Mephisto.
  5. Donation bbarr
    Chief Justice
    26 Jul '03 08:20
    Originally posted by Mephisto2
    There have been many discussions about TO, wether to take it automatically or not, vacation settings, ethics, etc. Here is a proposal that I would like your opinion on. The player that thought of it has already gotten confirmation from Russ that, if there is enough interest from the RHP community, it could be implemented.

    Instead of a TO for the single ...[text shortened]... how many moves, in how many days. How many variants, etc...

    What do you think?

    Mephisto.
    Although I find the idea intriguing, I'm unclear as to the benefits of adopting such a system. You claim that this resolves the vacation problem (by which, I think, you mean that this system's automatic time-out feature will make moot discussion concerning the moral status of timing someone out while thery're on vacation). But suppose we just implemented an across the board automatic time-out policy, wouldn't this work just as well? What other advantages do you think your proposed system has?
  6. 26 Jul '03 08:52
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Although I find the idea intriguing, I'm unclear as to the benefits of adopting such a system. You claim that this resolves the vacation problem (by which, I think, you mean that this system's automatic time-out feature will make moot discussion concerning the moral status of timing someone out while thery're on vacation). But suppose we just implemented ...[text shortened]... wouldn't this work just as well? What other advantages do you think your proposed system has?
    I see not only that the automatic TO resolves the 'moral' aspects.
    The fact that we can have tournaments and clan matches with several weeks for a given number of moves (without affecting the total duration of the game), allows players to plan their moves, and still go on holiday for several weeks.
  7. Donation ReelEmInReid
    Just lost
    26 Jul '03 12:08
    This sounds like a much better way of handling time outs than the current system. All other correspondence chess I know of works with a similar system rather than a set time per move.

    It allows people to go on holiday even when it is a quick game if they like.

    nemesio has a good point but I think with any system, there'll always be people who play on while they're lost and they are within their rights to do so.

    The system where you make so many moves in so many days allows the length of the game to be more tightly controlled. E.g. If I start a 7day timeout game I'll make a lot of my moves inside 2/3 days. I don't really need a 7 day timeout, I'm just happier with it for when I actually need it. So some 7-day timeout games take far longer than I'd like.

    I think we need to think whether its worth putting the work in to implement it but I for one would prefer it.

    Just my two pennies worth.

    John.
  8. Donation ReelEmInReid
    Just lost
    26 Jul '03 12:11
    Just one more thing:

    I've mentioned this system a while ago to several players, most thought it a good idea. Maybe we could canvas opinion further?

    John.
  9. 26 Jul '03 12:23
    Originally posted by ReelEmInReid
    Just one more thing:

    I've mentioned this system a while ago to several players, most thought it a good idea. Maybe we could canvas opinion further?

    John.
    I won to the next round of a knock out by auto time out. I would have allowed extra time if I had control.
    I am in round 2 of New Year tournament.We have already lost hotpawn in our group to automatic.He says he is having a break but I might have delayed claiming until we got past the opening in other games.In the same tournament Rmx is being timed out.I believe he is on 14 day vacation.I would not have claimed that.
    7 day time out games could be 4 moves in 28 days to allow players to go on holiday or business trips or even can't make moves because they are ill.
  10. Standard member SirLoseALot
    Shut Gorohoviy!
    26 Jul '03 17:19
    I get it now😏 Not sure it would solve anything,I'm way too stupid😳
    But it sounds all right to me.😀
  11. Standard member Crowley
    Not Aleister
    26 Jul '03 20:30
    Sounds good to me.
  12. 27 Jul '03 16:52
    Originally posted by Mephisto2
    There have been many discussions about TO, wether to take it automatically or not, vacation settings, ethics, etc. Here is a proposal that I would like your opinion on. The player that thought of it has already gotten confirmation from Russ that, if there is enough interest from the RHP community, it could be implemented.

    Instead of a TO for the single ...[text shortened]... how many moves, in how many days. How many variants, etc...

    What do you think?

    Mephisto.
    This is similar to an idea that was mooted several months ago (and also a coupla other times) when there was a debate about the inordinate length of time some tournaments were taking. In theory I'm for it, but I would suggest (if possible) creating a tournament with this timeout system and seeing how it works in practice, sort of as a dummy run.

    T1000
  13. Donation belgianfreak
    stitching you up
    28 Jul '03 14:21
    I've been trying to think of a way it'd fall down or how people could use it to cheet. Am I right in, in a 5 moves in 7 days scenario, both players would have a clock counting down at the same time to make 5 moves in the first 7 days? What if neither player moved enough? Could you get white waiting until the last possible second to make the 5th move, leaving black on 4 and an automatic timeout?

    Or are you saying your clock only moves down when it's your move? That could make it 5 moves in 14 days (it being your opponents move for the other 7).

    Would you always have to make 5 moves every 7 days, so even if I had just moved 20 times today I would still have to move 5 times in the next 7 days. This would make vacation impossible to take, no?

    One thing though - it'd get very confusing trying to play your games and work out how many moves you had to make in each game in the next X amount of time. We would need some kind of clock next to each game, or something stating "you have to make X moves in the next Y days/hours/minutes"

    Sorry, I'm probably just very confused. A trial tourney sounds like an excellent plan, to see if it works and get the bugs out of the system.

  14. 28 Jul '03 16:56
    "Or are you saying your clock only moves down when it's your move?".

    Yes, that's the idea. Your clock runs only while it's your move.

    "Would you always have to make 5 moves every 7 days...... This would make vacation impossible to take, no? "

    To be discussed wether one can save up time or not. But to really solve the vacation issue, I think it would be better to go for a 20 moves in 30 days or something like that.

    ".....it'd get very confusing trying to play your games and work out how many moves you had to make...."

    Yes, it would be important to make the clock position very clear to both opponents (and kibitzers) at all times.

    "A trial tourney sounds like an excellent plan"

    Agreed, that was a good suggestion by T1000.

    Mephisto.
  15. 28 Jul '03 20:38
    I would prefer such a time-system! I think it's a very good proposal that should be test in a tournament.