| Subject: |
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Champions League - cycle time |
| Name: |
|
John Knudsen |
| Date Posted: |
|
Feb 13, 07 - 4:18 PM |
| Website (Optional): |
|
http://www.cafepress.com/correspondence |
| Message: |
|
Hi Ron:
There are LOTS of folks who think like you, Ron, IMHO.
The difference between 10/40 and 10/60 is a significant one, for the players who feel that
they need the extra reflection time in order to compete due to their work schedules, family
matters, and everything else that is part of the equation. Methinks changing the CL to
10/40, as an example, would be a big mistake - you would lose a lot of good players who
do not want to deal with a faster time control like that.
The 10/60 reflection time has little to do with DMD, in my not so humble opinion. If I am a
faster player, and I want a faster pace than that, I will just adjust my response time, taking
(for example) 2 to 3 days for my moves, which has the end effect of speeding up the game
without taking anything away from my opponent's "rights".
The DMD problem is two-fold:
1. A player is allowed to use too much time for any one move during a game. Currently,
if the proper notifications are given, one can repeatedly use 40+ days for a single move
during a game, and this CANNOT be what the framers of the playing rules intended...
Most TDs have enough sense to not allow such nonsense, for non-special circumstances,
but quite a few (I believe) actually think that a player can use their reflection time ANY WAY
THEY WANT TO. So, TD Bingo is a factor here, too.
2. A player is allowed to accumulate too much reflection time. 200-300 days is not unusual
during a game, depending upon how fast the opening and early middlegame is played.
This is plain stupid, and allows problem players to cause all kinds of DMD havoc in their
problem games, should they wish to do so.
I believe the solution is to leave the reflection time the way it is, and change how much can
be used on a single move, and also, how much can be accumulated. Pretty simple stuff to
fix, in the big picture, without cramping anyone's style (except, of course, the potential problem
players).
John |
|
Replies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|