1. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    23 Feb '06 09:011 edit
    Timebanks shouldn't cater only for withdrawels, but deposits too.

    When a player moves before his timeout period, a portion of the remaining time should be deposited into the player's timebank. The timebank should be allowed to grow beyond its original size.

    This will give players more control over time management, and allow them to prepare better for upcoming holidays. It will also allow them to "recharge" their timebanks when they return.

    Although the timebank increases, it will not bog down tournaments or slow down gameplay in any way, since the timebank can only grow in response to faster play.

    It is, however, a clear incentive to moving timeously. And that can't be a bad thing.

    Those players who desire more timeout and vacation leniency at RHP will now be able to earn it.

    It will not affect tournaments that have only timebanks, since there are no timeout savings to be made.

    My initial suggestion is that players be "paid" 25% of the remaining timeout period when they move ahead of the time control. And that timebanks can grow to double their original size. There is even a good case for allowing unlimited growth. But these are variables that can be debated.
  2. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    23 Feb '06 09:33
    Originally posted by Gatecrasher
    Timebanks shouldn't cater only for withdrawels, but deposits too.

    When a player moves before his timeout period, a portion of the remaining time should be deposited into the player's timebank. The timebank should be allowed to grow beyond its original size.

    This will give players more control over time management, and allow them to prepare better ...[text shortened]... n a good case for allowing unlimited growth. But these are variables that can be debated.
    So, let's say I'm in a game with a timebank of 14 days and I know I'll be gone for two months soon. All I have to do is make five moves the same day and then I have a timebank of 70 days and I can leave?

    I don't like it. Even if I make several moves a day I should only have a 14 day timebank, and when I start using it it should deplete. That's the whole purpose of it; to allow some leeway, but also to make sure that eventually there will be moves.

    Imagine what happens if I make twenty moves in one day and then realizes that I'm about to lose and decides to use up my timebank before I make my next move.

    ???

    Or did I completely miss your point?.. 😳
  3. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    23 Feb '06 09:451 edit
    Originally posted by stocken
    Or did I completely miss your point?.. 😳
    Somewhat.

    Say you play a typical game with a 3 day timeout and 7 day timebank. If you made 5 consecutive moves directly after your opponent moves, you have saved 15 days. I'm suggesting that 25% of that saving be added to your timebank. So now your timebank will have grown to 7+3.75 = 10.75 days.

    It won't slow the game down at all. On the contrary, there is an incentive to speed the game up. You could easily have taken 15 days to make those moves without any penalty at all. This way the game moves quicker, and you've "earned" a time extension to your holiday, should you choose to take one.
  4. Behind you...
    Joined
    24 Feb '04
    Moves
    28311
    23 Feb '06 09:45
    Originally posted by Gatecrasher
    Timebanks shouldn't cater only for withdrawels, but deposits too.

    When a player moves before his timeout period, a portion of the remaining time should be deposited into the player's timebank. The timebank should be allowed to grow beyond its original size.

    This will give players more control over time management, and allow them to prepare better ...[text shortened]... n a good case for allowing unlimited growth. But these are variables that can be debated.
    Think the word you're sort of looking for is increment (if I'm spelling it correctly).
  5. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    23 Feb '06 13:28
    Originally posted by seraphimvulture
    Think the word you're sort of looking for is increment (if I'm spelling it correctly).
    Increment is a nice word. But I sort of wasn't looking for it particularly. A timebank is analogous with a bank account, so the words I chose were analogous to money.
  6. Standard memberRedmike
    Godless Commie
    Glasgow
    Joined
    06 Jan '04
    Moves
    171019
    23 Feb '06 15:50
    I think this is a good idea. Of course, the details would be subject to tweaking.
    It would reward good opening knowledge, for a start....
  7. Standard memberWulebgr
    Angler
    River City
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    16907
    23 Feb '06 18:16
    Gatecrasher's suggestion offers an alternate conception of time control than currently employed at RHP. I play at another site where this system is in force, and there the most popular (because default) time control is 30 days + 2 days per move. Many of these games accumulate more than 100 days quickly. Then, if an opponet quits or dies, it can take several months for the timeout (unless the site admin intervenes).

    I like the current RHP system, but expanding the range of choices for time controls is a good idea.
  8. Joined
    17 Jun '05
    Moves
    9211
    23 Feb '06 18:28
    One thing that could be done is to have both options possible when starting a game. I don't see it as a massive problem if people sometimes grow large timebanks, personaly I don't think it would make me move any faster as I move fast enough in some games as it is.
  9. Standard memberRavello
    The Rude©
    who knows?
    Joined
    30 Dec '03
    Moves
    176648
    23 Feb '06 18:491 edit
    Originally posted by Gatecrasher
    Timebanks shouldn't cater only for withdrawels, but deposits too.

    When a player moves before his timeout period, a portion of the remaining time should be deposited into the player's timebank. The timebank should be allowed to grow beyond its original size.

    This will give players more control over time management, and allow them to prepare better n a good case for allowing unlimited growth. But these are variables that can be debated.
    No thanks,having the timebank is already enough ,making it increment would be an incentive for game draggers.

    Why reward players which play within the timeout limits?

    It should be a normal thing,not something to be rewarded.
  10. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    23 Feb '06 19:021 edit
    Originally posted by Ravello
    No thanks,having the timebank is already enough ,making it increment would be an incentive for game draggers.
    I think you missed the point. Game draggers are not rewarded. You only receive a portion of the timeout remaining when you make your move. So if you are playing with a 3 day timeout, and you play 2 days and 23 hours after the last move was made, you will only have a measly 15 minutes ( @25% ) added to your time bank. If you play an hour after the previous move, you will have 17 hours 45 minutes added. Clearly the incentive is to play fast. Not to drag your games.
  11. Standard memberRedmike
    Godless Commie
    Glasgow
    Joined
    06 Jan '04
    Moves
    171019
    23 Feb '06 22:46
    One thing which occurred to me is that this might give advantages to people depending on the relative time-zones.

    Is this a consideration?
  12. The Great North
    Joined
    26 Nov '05
    Moves
    1278
    24 Feb '06 00:27
    RHP isnt a live site. Thats the beuty of it. I can take all day and think about a move rather then some guy waiting at the other end ready t pounce as soon as he is able to. If you want a quick game, go to yahoo chess where it is live. Also, think about (this may sound odd coming from a "non-subscriber"😉 people with like 40 games going on? they would lose in this transaction. The next thing this will lead to is penalties for not moving fast.

    My point being that your idea would take away from the whole idea of chess and add an entirely different part of the game. It's like adding another row of properties right down the middle of the monopoly game. Or, a more chess related answer, adding another peaice to the game. This would add rash actions and careless moves and take a way the thrill (yes, thrill) of the game.
  13. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    24 Feb '06 01:07
    Originally posted by Redmike
    One thing which occurred to me is that this might give advantages to people depending on the relative time-zones.

    Is this a consideration?
    Well, that already happens in timebank only games. But it doesn't matter where you are in the world, there is someone to your left and your right. So these things even out.
  14. Standard memberGatecrasher
    Whale watching
    33°36'S 26°53'E
    Joined
    05 Feb '04
    Moves
    41150
    24 Feb '06 01:452 edits
    Originally posted by AlpineXazax
    RHP isnt a live site. Thats the beuty of it. I can take all day and think about a move rather then some guy waiting at the other end ready t pounce as soon as he is able to. If you want a quick game, go to yahoo chess where it is live. Also, think about (this may sound odd coming from a "non-subscriber"😉 people with like 40 games going on? they would los ould add rash actions and careless moves and take a way the thrill (yes, thrill) of the game.
    You are getting a little melodramatic here. If players start rushing their games and making careless moves just to add some time onto their timebanks then they are idiots, and would probably have lost their games anyway.

    Does it add another aspect to the game? No, it adds another aspect to the time management of the game. But the game itself doesn't change at all. You still have to find the best possible move.

    There are already penalties for not moving fast - its called being timed out.

    The more games you play, the more time you take cycling through your games. So, yes, if you choose to play 40 (I wish I had so few) or 100 or 200 games simultaneously, you wouldn't benefit as much. But why should you? Remember that what I'm proposing is not a penalty. You can still take all your timeout period and still have your timebank.

    Consider the present scenario, and it is not uncommon... A 7 day timeout, a 7 day time timebank. Player A never takes more than 1 day to make a move. Player B moves every Sunday. At move 85, the game has dragged on for over 18 months. Player A goes away one Saturday, and arrives back on the Monday 16 days later. And he's been timed out! Even though he has only used 100 days to make all his moves, whereas player B has taken over 500 days.

    This proposal is a way putting some time management control into the hands of the players, to allow them to plan ahead, and to make up for any recent erosion of their timebanks.

    It means that if you are a player who cycles through your games well ahead of the time controls, you'll have more leeway, when at some point, you are forced to take a break from RHP.

    If you are a player who likes to take the full timeout period to make all your moves. Well, nothing's changed, has it?
  15. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    17944
    24 Feb '06 03:04
    i love this idea because it will help the people who move every day but for whatever reason can't move for a week or so.
Back to Top