I just wanted to add that I don't see the benefit of this new system. It's confusing and must be more difficult to handle in the programming. Besides, 7 moves in 20 days means that they don't have to move in 19 days which is way too long for some people to wait so then you'll have to do a 1 move in 7 days for the people who like shorter games and 3 moves in 3 days and 1 move in 1 day and .... why? There is nothing wrong with the current system. If you have this new system in place you still have to decide to T/O or not to T/O and if it will be automatic then keep the current system and make it automatic.
Way too much whining is going on about the T/O's anyway. There are more important improvements that should be the focus instead of this stuff. You know if we let Russ work on it, he can maybe get RHP Live going faster and then you don't have to worry about T/O's if you don't want to.
- Joined
- 26 Apr 03
- Moves
- 26771
I think, if the system is implemented it should allow combinations, such as "7 moves in 20 days + 1 move in 10 days". "All moves in 1 day" is essentially RHP live, isn't it? So implementing this does not really delay RHP live that much.... 😕
ps. "All moves in 1 day" as a special setting is not that important if effort is an issue as I suppose we could use configurations such as "9999 moves in 1 day" instead. 😕😕
- Joined
- 26 Apr 03
- Moves
- 26771
Originally posted by ChessNutI was trying to say that a game with "all moves in one day" IS rhp live, i.e once this feature is implemented, RHP live is perhaps almost done too!
Only in that Russ and Chris can only program one thing at a time. If they are working on the T/O system then they can't be working on the Live version.
I think the idea of RHP live is that the opponent sees the moves happening on the screen in front of them, rather than being notified by email/web page etc.. So you can have games with 5 minutes for all moves by each player or 30 minutes say.
The n moves in x days seems to me to be very much more for correspondence play.
Originally posted by mariposaYes Mariposa I agree with you. I dont timeout players who are in vacation. Even if they're not, I wait at least one or two weeks more. Same thing for Miss Take who couldn't not make just one move!
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 b ...[text shortened]... llow players to go on holiday or business trips or even can't make moves because they are ill.
Because of this I lost about 300 pts and dont really want of go on play here. I subscribed to RHP because it seemed to me as a funny site. But now everything's serious - too serious.
Originally posted by ChessNutTo me the time-out system as it is here is the main reason I started playing at another site!
I just wanted to add that I don't see the benefit of this new system. It's confusing and must be more difficult to handle in the programming. Besides, 7 moves in 20 days means that they don't have to move in 19 days which is way too long for some people to wait so then you'll have to do a 1 move in 7 days for the people who like shorter games and 3 mo ...[text shortened]... get RHP Live going faster and then you don't have to worry about T/O's if you don't want to.
THE MOST IMPORTANT DEFECT IS THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE A VACATION.
Only when I play 21-day timeouts I can take a vacation (this year I'm going on a vacation for 18 days). But I don't like a 21-day time-out for obvious reasons such as the possibility to stall a game for years (40 moves of each 21 days is already over 2 years) and not to be able to play in tournaments.
But at RHP I'm forced to play 21 day timeouts or risk being timed-out on vacation.
As long as this is not solved to my opinion RHP IS AND REMAINS AN AMATEURISTIC CHESS-SITE no matter what other improvements may come!!!
Also I think that this is the main reason the very good correspondence players will not join this site (of course there are exceptions).
So I fully support the idea of Mephisto2!
Quirine
I have been giving this some thought.
Mostly, I make at least one move per day, but I generally play 7 day timeouts just so that I don't feel pressured.
But, as we know, the trouble with that is that you can be in for some very long games.
I wonder what people think about the concept of "roll-over minutes". Let me explain...
Suppose myself and Russ start a game using a 1 day timeout. I make my move as White, and now Russ as 24 hours to make his move as Black.
He moves 6 hours later and accrues 18 hours of roll-over time. I then move 1 hour later and accrue 23 hours of roll-over time. Russ now has 24+18=42 hours to make his next move. He makes his move 32 hours later, and rolls over 10 hours. This "roll-over" process could continue up to a maximum (say, 3 times original timeout period).
This way, you will get rewarded for moving regularly by buying yourself some breathing space if you are unable to get to the site for some reason. At present it seems unfair that some people move very quickly, but then can get timed out half-way through a game because something unexpected happened that meant they couldn't move for a couple of days...
Any thoughts...?
Originally posted by Chrismointeresting idea. Two immediate comments though, that make me prefer the original proposal at the moment:
I have been giving this some thought.
........ At present it seems unfair that some people move very quickly, but then can get timed out half-way through a game because something unexpected happened that meant they couldn't move for a couple of days...
Any thoughts...?
1) It doesn't solve the vacation issue for a player who is on vacation when a new round of a tournament starts. And we know how unpredictable that is.
2) In the multi-move proposal, the estimation and control of the total duration of a game (and of tournament rounds) is better. The ratio between average move time and longest move time is drastically reduced by grouping moves. Which is not the case here.
Mephisto.