i am not sure that it is best. but i certainly think it worth a trial.
in personal and clan games those 80 move marathons are wonderful, and even the last moves need great consideration to give the best game.
but in a tournament - who cares who wins, just finish the damn thing! lots of people are waiting. you can bet dantes wont require 80 moves to assert dominance over the rest of us.
i think it worth experimenting with the timebank and see how far it can be cut back without timeouts dominating. maybe even 21 day would work.
Originally posted by flexmore i am not sure that it is best. but i certainly think it worth a trial.
in personal and clan games those 80 move marathons are wonderful, and even the last moves need great consideration to give the best game.
but in a tournament - who cares who wins, just finish the damn thing! lots of people are waiting. you can bet dantes wont require 80 moves to ...[text shortened]... k and see how far it can be cut back without timeouts dominating. maybe even 21 day would work.
Originally posted by flexmore i am not sure that it is best. but i certainly think it worth a trial.
in personal and clan games those 80 move marathons are wonderful, and even the last moves need great consideration to give the best game.
but in a tournament - who cares who wins, just finish the damn thing! lots of people are waiting. you can bet dantes wont require 80 moves to ...[text shortened]... k and see how far it can be cut back without timeouts dominating. maybe even 21 day would work.
I think this is a great idea - I fully support it and it was a key driver for implementing the timebank feature.
Rest assured that I am hoping to get this going as soon as possible.
0 Day timeout + 28 day timebank
22 Jan '04 09:491 edit
Back to Top