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

Tournaments Forum

  1. 23 Mar '05 13:43 / 1 edit
    Can someone explain how the automatic timeout works in the 2005 tournament?

    I know it is automatic timeout after 2 days, but does this mean that this only happens if your opponent doesn't move at all for 2 days, or is it timed out after 2 days even if your opponent makes some moves in this time?

    thanks

    edit: inserted thanks and a smiley thing...
  2. 23 Mar '05 14:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by kw72uk
    Can someone explain how the automatic timeout works in the 2005 tournament?

    I know it is automatic timeout after 2 days, but does this mean that this only happens if your opponent doesn't move at all for 2 days, or is it timed out after ...[text shortened]... time?

    thanks

    edit: inserted thanks and a smiley thing...
    The 2005 Championship tournament comes with a 6o day timebank. So the automatic time-outs will only kick in 2 days after the player has used up their entire 60 days timebank allowance. Although you might as well time them out as soon as you get the chance, rather then wait for the auto time-out.
  3. 23 Mar '05 14:55 / 1 edit
    Hey,

    I suggest to read the "2005 Championships - Timeouts coming Near (...)" thread at www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=21077.

    thanks

    Edit: Cheers Mr. Tebb!!! That's it! Time them out as soon as u can. The RHP community are anxious for the 2005 Champion, specially now that Kaspy has quited from professional chess... :'(
  4. 23 Mar '05 16:54
    Originally posted by David Tebb
    The 2005 Championship tournament comes with a 6o day timebank. So the automatic time-outs will only kick in 2 days after the player has used up their entire 60 days timebank allowance. Although you might as well time them out as soon as you get the chance, rather then wait for the auto time-out.
    I understand that, and will probably time out straight away. What I was trying to work out was whether they had to not move for two days for the auto-timeout to happen, or if it would happen even if they were moving again within the two days
  5. 23 Mar '05 18:13
    Originally posted by kw72uk
    I understand that, and will probably time out straight away. What I was trying to work out was whether they had to not move for two days for the auto-timeout to happen, or if it would happen even if they were moving again within the two days
    As I understand it (although I'm not totally confident) the automatic time-out will happen 2 days after the timebank runs out, regardless of whether or not they've subsequently moved. Otherwise a game could drag on indefinitely and the tournament might never end.
  6. 23 Mar '05 19:05
    Originally posted by David Tebb
    As I understand it (although I'm not totally confident) the automatic time-out will happen 2 days after the timebank runs out, regardless of whether or not they've subsequently moved. Otherwise a game could drag on indefinitely and the tournament might never end.
    Thanks for the answer Mr Tebb
  7. Standard member flexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    23 Mar '05 20:36
    Originally posted by David Tebb
    As I understand it (although I'm not totally confident) the automatic time-out will happen 2 days after the timebank runs out, regardless of whether or not they've subsequently moved. Otherwise a game could drag on indefinitely and the tournament might never end.
    i think your comment is misleading ...
    i think:
    if their timebank runs out and you catch them before they move, then you can time them out.
    if their timebank runs out and they do not move for two days then auto timeouts kick in.
    however ... if you never time them out, and just rely on autotimeout, and they suddenly start playing ever couple of days regularly, then they will never be timed out ...
  8. 23 Mar '05 21:56
    Originally posted by flexmore
    i think your comment is misleading ...
    i think:
    if their timebank runs out and you catch them before they move, then you can time them out.
    if their timebank runs out and they do not move for two days then auto timeouts kick in.
    however ... if you never time them out, and just rely on autotimeout, and they suddenly start playing ever couple of days regularly, then they will never be timed out ...
    I think the same...
  9. 24 Mar '05 00:24
    Originally posted by flexmore
    i think your comment is misleading ...
    i think:
    if their timebank runs out and you catch them before they move, then you can time them out.
    if their timebank runs out and they do not move for two days then auto timeouts kick in.
    however ... if you never time them out, and just rely on autotimeout, and they suddenly start playing ever couple of days regularly, then they will never be timed out ...
    You may well be right. The auto time-out function probably hasn't been developed sufficiently to cater for such situations as a tournament with a zero time-out plus timebank setting (I believe the 2005 Championship is the only such tournament)

    Hopefully the question will be academic, with the win being manually claimed at some point. There's not much point in having these timebank only tournaments otherwise.
  10. Standard member flexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    24 Mar '05 04:29
    Originally posted by David Tebb
    You may well be right. The auto time-out function probably hasn't been developed sufficiently to cater for such situations as a tournament with a zero time-out plus timebank setting (I believe the 2005 Championship is the only such tournament)

    Hopefully the question will be academic, with the win being manually claimed at some point. There's not much point in having these timebank only tournaments otherwise.

    i think all tournaments are badly affected by the two day delay ...

    i think it is time for timeouts to be instantaneous wherever they are automatic ... then the timelimits for everyone can be just a little longer, with the same speed of play.
  11. 24 Mar '05 14:05 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by David Tebb

    (...) auto time-out (...) hasn't been developed sufficiently (...) the question will be academic, with the win being manually claimed


    Originally posted by flexmore

    (...) tournaments are badly affected by the two day delay (...) it is time for timeouts to be instantaneous
    I think the solution for this problem is in OTB tournaments.

    There's no automatic TO, but every competitor announces his opponent's clock ending at the first chance. And It's fair, it's the tournament rule.

    It's draw when a player lacking material to mate announces his opponent time-out (How does it works in RHP? it seems to be matter for a new thread).

    The problem is what must be done when two players keep playing beyond their time?

    This problem have to be cracked into two other problems. One easy to solve, and another more difficult, but maybe FIDE or USCF has already solved the difficult one.

    The easier is: When two players keep on playing beyond their time a game that has no more importance for tournament.

    Solution: Just let them playing until their death and start the next round with the players that has progressed to.

    The more difficult is: When two players keep on playing beyond their time a game that can define a next round competitor or the tournament winner.

    I think it's quite rare to happen in an actual tournament, but in the Internet everything is possible.

    The only natural solution for this problem that I can see resides on the players fairness and in the players notion of fairness.

    It must be told to every tournament competitor, that to time his opponent out at the first chance is absolutely fair.

    As I have sad in the other threat: It's fair with the winner, he deserves the win. It's fair with the loser, it's the tournament rule. It's fair with the other competitors, they are waiting for the game end to be able to start the next round. It's fair with the tournament manager, he needs that it ends into the schedule. And it's fair with the community that wants to know who's the champion.

    But what to do when fairness fails? Specially in the Internet where it often fails?

    As I sad before, maybe FIDE, USCF or another national or international chess federation has a solution for it.

    Anyway, the intantaneous timeout solves everything, but it sounds to be something arbitrary.
  12. Standard member Gatecrasher
    Whale watching
    29 Mar '05 18:22
    I support automatic timeouts in all competative (rated) games, and at the exact moment the timebank is extinguished.

    What's the point of the 2005 championship ending mid-way through 2006?

    I understand that we are here to play chess, and not watch clocks, but upholding the niceties at the expence of a multitude of time-related problems (including indefinite games and tournaments, and a completely stalled clan league) is just not worth it.

    Automatic timeouts: Clean. Sweet. Simple. No arguments. No fights. No recriminations. Something everyone can adjust to and comprehend.

  13. 29 Mar '05 20:32
    Originally posted by Gatecrasher
    I support automatic timeouts in all competative (rated) games, and at the exact moment the timebank is extinguished.

    What's the point of the 2005 championship ending mid-way through 2006?

    I understand that we are here to play chess, and not watch clocks, but upholding the niceties at the expence of a multitude of time-related problems (including ...[text shortened]... o arguments. No fights. No recriminations. Something everyone can adjust to and comprehend.

    I surrender... That's it...

    It's "Clean. Sweet. Simple. No arguments. No fights. No recriminations. Something everyone can adjust to and comprehend".

    Maybe it's time to vote...