Sam Trenholme wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 11:40 PM UTC:
Fergus: That sounds like a good time control, but games may last longer than two months. Consider this: a game may need 30 or even 60 moves (60 to 120 plies) to be decided; I game at 24 hours/2 weeks can very well last four months.
One thing we can do is have it so, if one side feels they have a significantly stronger position and the other side is just dragging the game out, make it feasible to adjudicate games so they don’t last for months.
My idea is 18 hours/two weeks for most games and 12 hours/two weeks for HyperModern Shatranj (since this game otherwise would have a somewhat slower pace than the other five proposed games); after two months, either side can request an adjudication.
These shorter time controls will guarantee that games will be decided within two months; allowing adjudication will guarantee we don’t have a game last six months because someone with, say, a bishop and a pawn refuses to resign against his opponent with a rook and two pawns.
I really don’t want to see this tournament last over six months.
One thing we can do is have it so, if one side feels they have a significantly stronger position and the other side is just dragging the game out, make it feasible to adjudicate games so they don’t last for months.
My idea is 18 hours/two weeks for most games and 12 hours/two weeks for HyperModern Shatranj (since this game otherwise would have a somewhat slower pace than the other five proposed games); after two months, either side can request an adjudication.
These shorter time controls will guarantee that games will be decided within two months; allowing adjudication will guarantee we don’t have a game last six months because someone with, say, a bishop and a pawn refuses to resign against his opponent with a rook and two pawns.
I really don’t want to see this tournament last over six months.
Any other suggestions?