Now in the right forum and as a follow up to "Too many games" in Only Chess,I would like to add this: a) When I advocate faster-concluding tournaments I'm referring specifically to the 3/7 and 7/14 time-limit tournaments which drag on as postal games because of a MINORITY of players; b) Since games have time-limits, time-limits should also apply to tournaments for the same reason.My suggestion is to have a time limit per round of,say,60 days for the 3/7 and 120 days for the 7/14; c) I haven't worked out the details of such implementation but I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult and the RHP administration would be able to do it.
Originally posted by ptriple42An average chess game is near 40 moves. That is 40 moves each (80 ply)
Now in the right forum and as a follow up to "Too many games" in Only Chess,I would like to add this: a) When I advocate faster-concluding tournaments I'm referring specifically to the 3/7 and 7/14 time-limit tournaments which drag on as postal games because of a MINORITY of players; b) Since games have time-limits, time-limits should also apply to tournam ...[text shortened]... t I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult and the RHP administration would be able to do it.
3 days per move is about 240 days, if each takes near full 3 days to move.
You can't put that in 60 days. There isn't a solution, outside of patience. Tournaments take a long time, play some clan matches for quick fix of 'conclusion'.
P-
Anti- recommend?
I'm sorry but this is correspondence chess.
You agree with the time limits when you play a game with another chump.
Choose shorter time limits or like phlab said, get some clan games going- seems more people are willing to kick my ass quicker in those games 😛
edit: phlab said it, not greenpawn. fixed
Originally posted by ptriple42So you want to restrict the time limits for the already time limited games because some players use the fully alloted time to make their moves.
Now in the right forum and as a follow up to "Too many games" in Only Chess,I would like to add this: a) When I advocate faster-concluding tournaments I'm referring specifically to the 3/7 and 7/14 time-limit tournaments which drag on as postal games because of a MINORITY of players; b) Since games have time-limits, time-limits should also apply to tournam ...[text shortened]... t I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult and the RHP administration would be able to do it.
I have a far better idea. Why not make it that once any player has finished a game in a tournament then every other game must finish within 7 days. That would certainly speed up tournaments.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Since this piece of objective criticism has had 5 recommendations I must comment...
"I haven't worked out the details of such implementation...."
This is the Site Ideas Forum.
What you want is the Forum for [b]Half Baked Ideas.
Since there is no Half Baked Ideas. Forum try the Religious Forum
because this idea does not have a hope in Hell of going anywhere.[/b]
An idea is a mental concept which, if required to be converted into a practical form, will need a "mechanical" approach.The implementation of my proposal would require RHP's computer software;neither I nor you are qualified for that,obviously.
And that is all the substance contained in your post...I've seen elsewhere your posts and too often they contain this from-my-pedestal approach,also supposedly humorous.That my proposal has some merit is obvious,also borne by another reason of the clogging up of RHP storage (see Russ' announcement of February 2009).Pawn,if you have something constructive come down and say it but in the meantime grow up,you may still get to be - a queen?
Originally posted by ptriple42You would be lucky to learn to write posts half as witty and entertaining as greenpawn's.
Since this piece of objective criticism has had 5 recommendations I must comment...
An idea is a mental concept which, if required to be converted into a practical form, will need a "mechanical" approach.The implementation of my proposal would require RHP's computer software;neither I nor you are qualified for that,obviously.
And that is all the substanc ...[text shortened]... ructive come down and say it but in the meantime grow up,you may still get to be - a queen?
OK, so you put up a bad idea and got pwnd. But don't disgrace yourself further by whining about it. Instead, quietly unbunch your panties, and try to do better next time.
Regards,
SG
Originally posted by ptriple42It was a bad idea, will you admit that and we move on? Or will you argue there is a solution to make games end even though the allotted times have not expired?
Since this piece of objective criticism has had 5 recommendations I must comment...
An idea is a mental concept which, if required to be converted into a practical form, will need a "mechanical" approach.The implementation of my proposal would require RHP's computer software;neither I nor you are qualified for that,obviously.
And that is all the substanc ...[text shortened]... ructive come down and say it but in the meantime grow up,you may still get to be - a queen?
This happens often is why you took a 'hard time'. New user wants to have cake, and eat it too. "I want to play 7 day games, but games should end in a timely fashion. I'll decide how long games should REALLY take.
P-
Hi ptriple
"...but in the meantime grow up."
Tried growing up once. Hated it. Adults are too serious for me.
Putting a time scale on tournaments (though you have no idea how this is to
be done) is not what the players entered the tournament for.
One of the oldest still running tournaments I could find Tournament 65 started in 2003
it is called Having Fun?.
But you want them to stop having fun, (though you have no idea how to do it.)
The only way I can see it being done is to introduce adjudications and that would
really slow things up as players will never resign or sit on their plus position using
up their full allocated time to lengthen then game hoping the system that adjudicates
their games can find them a draw/win.
Sub up, you get unlimited games so the odd slow movers are not a problem.
Then you to can have some fun.
- Joined
- 07 Mar 09
- Moves
- 32471
I'll still say: one day someone will pull another "atri" and sign up for well over 2000 games that they do not intend to play and use every delaying tactic they can to stretch out every one of those games. I don't care if people are playing within the time constraints set for a tournament (including using the vacation flag when they are unavailable.) Why can't we just prevent people from signing up for tournaments when they are on vacation? It would hurt no one and would greatly decrease the possibility for abuse. [crickets chirp, chirp, chirp...]
Originally posted by TerrierJackI am on vacation.
I'll still say: one day someone will pull another "atri" and sign up for well over 2000 games that they do not intend to play and use every delaying tactic they can to stretch out every one of those games. I don't care if people are playing within the time constraints set for a tournament (including using the vacation flag when they are unavailable.) W ...[text shortened]... one and would greatly decrease the possibility for abuse. [crickets chirp, chirp, chirp...]
I can't join a tourney!
OH NO!
Cancel Vacation, click click.
Join tourney, click click.
Go on vacation... click click.
Where's the solution?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitYou can't book vacation for the current day, it has to be done in advance. I'm not sure but I don't think you can cancel vacation on the current day either.
I am on vacation.
I can't join a tourney!
OH NO!
Cancel Vacation, click click.
Join tourney, click click.
Go on vacation... click click.
Where's the solution?
P-
If that's the case then in your example it would cost a vacation abuser a whole day to join a tournament.
Originally posted by TerrierJackCurrently there are 30 open tournaments, the largest of which currently has 121 entrants of whom 5 are flying the flag.
I'll still say: one day someone will pull another "atri" and sign up for well over 2000 games that they do not intend to play and use every delaying tactic they can to stretch out every one of those games. I don't care if people are playing within the time constraints set for a tournament (including using the vacation flag when they are unavailable.) W ...[text shortened]... one and would greatly decrease the possibility for abuse. [crickets chirp, chirp, chirp...]
In total there are 9 people with vacation flags flying in all tournaments.
Stopping these 9 people from signing up is really going to speed up the tournaments.
As Phlabbabit says what is to stop someone entering a tournmant and going on vacation the next day, or would that not be allowed either under your rules?
Wouldn't the Hardcore tourneys meet the OP's requirements? 0/30 and 0/60 would seem to do the trick in terns of 60 and 120 day maximum round lengths. Vacations would still add to these maximum lengths, but it's as close as you can get to the objective without reinventing the entire time system.
Question is, if there were more Hardcores, would people actually play in them? I know I wouldn't as I'm pretty much a member of the "MINORITY" the OP is looking to reign in. But if enough players were interested and there were enough Hardcores to keep the OP happy, everyone wins.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Hi green,
Putting a time scale on tournaments (though you have no idea how this is to
be done) is not what the players entered the tournament for.
One of the oldest still running tournaments I could find Tournament 65 started in 2003
it is called Having Fun?.
But you want them to stop having fun, (though you have no idea how to do it.)
The only ...[text shortened]... u get unlimited games so the odd slow movers are not a problem.
Then you to can have some fun.[/b]
much improved contribution,congrats.No,I still have no idea how to implement a time limit on tournaments because it would be a RHP software problem,isn't it?
You're right,that 2003 tourn.is called Having Fun. Do you call that fun, to be in a tournament not finished after 7 years?!
Off the mark again about my wish to remove fun from them.It's precisely because I want to have fun by playing chess regularly-but being prevented by the nitwits who play chess like a game of marbles-that I would like to IMPROVE the rules.Out of 15 or 20 games players like me may have running,we are only able to play 2 or 3 a day; whereas the hundreds-of-games players are playing 20 or 25 a day-and messing up because no one can play chess accurately with so many games going. Is this so difficult to understand?
And no,I don't like wins by timeout nor when my opponent makes a mistake,be it lack of attention or overload.That is no fun for me.