1 2 3 > 
1 of 3
Poll
Would you like the ICC to change the 3-minute pool into a 3+2 pool?
Yes, I’d like the pool Time control to be 3+2 50
No, I don’t want ICC to change the 3-minute pool 23
Total Votes: 73
You must be a logged-in member to vote
3+2 Pool
Posted: 22 December 2015 03:06 PM  
Administrator
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  344
Joined  2011-11-18

ICC is considering to change the 3 0 pool into a 3 2 pool. This is to say three minutes plus 2-second increment.
3+2 is the official FIDE time control, and we have seen requests about ICC having such a pool.

But, before we make any change, we’d like to hear from you. Your feedback is important to us, and we will decide depending on it.

Feel free to give us your feedback posting on this thread, and voting!

Profile
Posted: 22 December 2015 04:55 PM   [ # 1 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2014-11-06

What would be ideal is a 3 0 and 3 2 but both take you to the same pool, so in this pool there could be 2 lots of players. I sometimes play 3 0 as I don’t have time for anything else.

Profile
Posted: 22 December 2015 09:14 PM   [ # 2 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-12-22

Why is the 3-minute pool getting axed for the 3+2 pool and not the 5-minute pool? This doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me. Wouldn’t this just split the blitz player-base while at the same time just simply take something away from bullet players?

I would still prefer a 3+2 pool regardless of what gets replaced though. I just don’t see a situation where I would play in both the 3+2 and 5+0 pools, where as I could see myself playing in both the 3+0 and 3+2 pools.

Profile
Posted: 22 December 2015 11:18 PM   [ # 3 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-10-16

If ICC removes the 3min pool and change it to 3+2 I am considering quitting ICC.

Profile
Posted: 23 December 2015 01:35 PM   [ # 4 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-06-01

3 2 is a good pool. it’s a great time control. it’s blitz but helps avoid impulsive errors with the small increment

Profile
Posted: 23 December 2015 02:20 PM   [ # 5 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-01-04

3 0 gives you almost no time to think; also, 3 2 is the FIDE time control and also produces much greater quality chess than just trying to flag your opponent from the beginning of the game.

Profile
Posted: 23 December 2015 04:16 PM   [ # 6 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2015-12-19

This is a tricky one because I’ve heard people say both that they would join or come back to the ICC if there were a 3+2 pool and similarly I have heard people say they would leave.

I would say that in an ideal world, the best solution would be to increase the number of players on the server by tempting folk to the ICC with chocolate, beer and tobacco*, so all time controls can co-exist with sufficient players in the pools, including 5+5 and 25+10. (This is probably easier said than done).

smile

*or free server time? Mailshot to all chess federations?

Profile
Posted: 24 December 2015 08:26 AM   [ # 7 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2014-11-06

I think this is a welcome move. Please shift to 3 + 2 Pool.

Profile
Posted: 24 December 2015 12:19 PM   [ # 8 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-12-24

3+2 is like the classical 5-m, so no point in introducing it, 3-m is fine as intermediate between bullet and the classical blitz

Profile
Posted: 26 December 2015 06:53 AM   [ # 9 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-08-12

Keep 3-0 pool and create a new 3-2 pool

Profile
Posted: 26 December 2015 12:16 PM   [ # 10 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-04-10

agree with post #9

Profile
Posted: 27 December 2015 08:22 AM   [ # 11 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2014-11-21

It will make the game to long for my interest. If I wanted a longer game I would play in the five minute pool. Maybe you can change the timing for tournament only.

Profile
Posted: 28 December 2015 10:22 AM   [ # 12 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-12-28

As other have said, 3+2 seems like a natural placement for 5+0 not 3+0.  I’d very much like 3+2 either way, but replacing 5+0 with it makes more sense to me.

Profile
Posted: 29 December 2015 07:27 PM   [ # 13 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2014-11-06

Possibly 1 of the better suggestions (if we can’t have both) is to replace the 5-min pool with a 3 2 pool. This makes allowances for those who don’t have time for more than 1 quick game and for those who do (in the pools).

Profile
Posted: 30 December 2015 12:18 PM   [ # 14 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2014-11-06

I prefer 3 2 insteade of 3 0!

Profile
Posted: 30 December 2015 01:03 PM   [ # 15 ]  
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2015-12-30

There needs to be a 3+2 pool added to the standard header choices. Maybe you could keep the 3 pool and eliminate one of the other ones. How much use does the 25 min, the chess 960 or PC computer pool get? Eliminate one of those if you must eliinate one.

Profile
 1 2 3 > 
1 of 3