Re: Claiming a draw in time trouble?


"David Richerby" <davidr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:wXv*o9D9q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Terry <terry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> David Richerby <davidr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The point of having time controls was not to discover who could
>>> play the best game of chess in, say, two hours, but to stop games
>>> going on arbitrarily long.
>>
>> Modern chess involves time management otherwise people could take
>> days to make one move !.
>
> Yes, I just said that.
>
> Of course modern chess involves time management. However, perfect
> time management is impossible because you don't know whether your
> opponent is the sort who will resign on move 25 when he's a piece down
> without compensation or make you play out the thirty moves to mate
> from that point. As I said, enough people found this to be a problem
> that Article 10.2 and increments were invented to make things better.
>
>
Good time management is possible. Always allow yourself 5 mins
to finish an easily won game. Article 10.2 was brought in to stop people
move the king to and fro.

Increments were brought in to help people who cannot manage their time.
In my opinion this partly deskills chess.
I always avoid tournaments with increments.

>> I dont know about about increments on the internet as I play 3 0 or
>> 5 0. Only players under 1500 seem to want to play with increments.
>
> Hey, how did you know my peak blitz rating on FICS was 1478? :-) A
> friend's FICS blitz rating is 1649 (peak 1739) and he plays almost
> exclusively 2 12. He seems to play quite a few games against 1500+
> players at that time control.
>
> I find myself wondering if there's a rating pool split going on here.
> G/3 and G/5 are pretty specialized disciplines -- for comparison, a
> 40-move game at 2 12 is effectively G/10 without the guaranteed time
> scramble if there's an endgame. I imagine and quite a lot of newbies
> will come in, lose a few games and decide they want a slower time
> control, which would leads to rating inflation among the G/3 / G/5
> regulars. In that case, it would be that a preference for playing at
> G/5 or faster that causes a rating over 1500, rather than a rating
> over 1500 causing a preference for G/5 play. This is just a
> hypothesis and not intended to denigrate anyone's rating.
>

There is definately a rating split on the internet. It is mostly the
stronger players
- say 1800+ who play 3 0 and 5 0. On ICC they have a seperate section for
5 - 0 and your rating is usually lower then standard blitz by 200 - 400
points.

I suspect this spilt occurs on all internet sites.

Regards

Terry


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is this a TN in the Mod Benoni?
    ... I hadn't gained that impression of him about chess players - in fact, ... hell-for-leather and wished he was still on the scene to play such tigers!. ... their challengers) do before every game. ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: Chess evolves...
    ... And black will likely understand his game better than you, ... Chess hasn't been solved. ... In some solved games it is the second play who forces the result. ... both players know all previous ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: chess tales from the real world
    ... I played in the first Chess Festival in Avoine, ... Glenn Flear and Tony Kosten! ... Why did they play so much in France? ... showed me and Kosten the well-known game Dizdarevic-Miles, ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: Whats this with huge Correspondence Ratings?
    ... the more ideas I found - sadly often for the opponent - and I ... I recall a game where I was an exchange up. ... rating points due to illness. ... My prediction is that if you continue to play, and put more time in on ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: Promoting Go in the USA
    ... community to engage in game warfare. ... One respects the players of any ... computers and not all computers play Chess. ...
    (rec.games.go)
Loading