Poll
Do you think classic chess time control should be faster?
Yes, I’d like games to be faster 4
No, I think time control (90 30 or 120 0) is the right one 7
Total Votes: 11
You must be a logged-in member to vote
Is chess moving to faster time controls?
Posted: 02 November 2015 12:39 PM  
Administrator
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  344
Joined  2011-11-18

The next Zurich Chess Challenge, which will take place in February 2016, with the participation of Anand, Kramnik, Nakamura, Aronian, Giri and Shirov, will present a brand-new time control for the “classic” games: 40 minutes to finish the game, with 10 second increment from move 1. The organizers said that “classic chess needs to move to faster time controls” to be more appealing to the public. What do you think?

Profile
Posted: 03 November 2015 07:54 AM   [ # 1 ]  
Administrator
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  344
Joined  2011-11-18

Here is an interesting point of view by IM Greg Shahade:

https://gregshahade.wordpress.com/2015/11/02/slow-chess-should-die-a-fast-death/

Profile
Posted: 03 November 2015 05:12 PM   [ # 2 ]  
Administrator
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  344
Joined  2011-11-18

I actually see a lively debate going on in Greg’s blog. Of course his style is provocative if not defiant, but that’s Greg’s style. If you follow his live shows and his blog, you’ll see that he’s not going to be diplomatic. Sometimes this can lead to constructive discussions, in my opinion.
I do love slow time controls - I am totally dumb at quick chess - but this doesn’t mean that faster time controls *might* bring chess to the next level, audience wise. We know from experience that having just a handful of people watching a 6 hour games, even when the players are top guys, is a bit frustrating. Chess, as it is now, is a game that won’t become a mass-media phenomenon. We have seen TV companies invest huge amount of money in order to bring chess to the masses, and they have more or less failed. If you are not a chess player with a true love for the game, how can you think to sit in front of a screen for 6 hours, looking at the faces that the players make during this horribly boring wood-pushing thing? cool smile
So, while I still think that 90+30 (or 120+0) is the best time controls for players who love the game, I don’t find it be a peregrine idea to experiment with faster time controls, and see if it can bring a larger audience to chess events.

Profile
Posted: 05 December 2015 06:19 AM   [ # 3 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2014-11-06

I enjoyed reading Greg’s blog and agree 100% with his assertion that if the game of chess was invented today the time controls used would not be 90/30 or one that allows the play to extend for hours.

Profile
Posted: 06 December 2015 08:40 AM   [ # 4 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2014-11-06

I believe that “if” the game of chess was invented in 2015 most people would not be willing to play it competitively at classic time controls. In point of fact most young players worldwide seem to prefer to play chess at fast time controls and I imagine this will continue as the new normal when they grow older.
I recall the Chairman of the USCF Rating Committee saying that most members of the USCF play game in 30 about 200 points weaker than they play at slower time controls. It is appealing to be able to play and finish a game within an hour for a lot of competitors

Profile
Posted: 31 December 2015 10:31 AM   [ # 5 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2015-12-19

I think Zurich is a good thing… in local leagues the time control at my level is 1hr for 30 moves + 15 minutes for the rest. Zurich is a little quicker than that.

The 40m+10s is doubtless to make sure games last around 2 hours or less. Maybe that’s about right for a spectator sport? I’m not sure what that would equate to. A morning play in cricket? A session of snooker?

Another advantage of short time controls is the possibility of two rounds a day, which would be good for spectators, choosing to stay for the morning or afternoon session, or staying all day.

I really don’t see the point in games lasting over 6 hours unless it’s the world championship. We aren’t in a Vienna, nor in a coffee shop, nor living in the 19th century.

This parallel is shared in other major mind sports like go and shogi, they have all been moving to shorter game times in general since events are on the telly and on streams.

Maybe Zurich is a little quick… but then again maybe it’s time enough.

Profile