Decrement time controls • page 1/1 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

WCIS-Ethan-House

#1

Just wondering, when will this officially be out? I'm really excited for this :)

What's the point?

Increment adds time and decrement subtracts time. It might be better if it was applied after 30 moves.

The player with less time would get incremented time and the player that had more time gets the decremented time controls. Both increment and decrement ends when both time controls equalize. It's a bell curve to make everyone pass on time.

School exam bell curves exist, so why not in chess time controls?

Increment adds time and decrement subtracts time. It might be better if it was applied after 30 moves. The player with less time would get incremented time and the player that had more time gets the decremented time controls. Both increment and decrement ends when both time controls equalize. It's a bell curve to make everyone pass on time. School exam bell curves exist, so why not in chess time controls?

Cedur216

#4

Nah it was good for an april fools but beyond that it's just completely dumb.

A) to be honest, it breaks games like 1-1 if the game is decided from an early time disadvantage and there's by far not enough moves for the winning side to checkmate. For classical games, I don't see a point anyways, just play without increment if you must ...

B) it was implemented with artificial lag because they didn't want to risk what could happen if they implement it in the way of instant time subtraction (which would be a must if this were a serious thing). Also mobile app players had the decrement cancelled, which additionally spoiled the fun.

Nah it was good for an april fools but beyond that it's just completely dumb. A) to be honest, it breaks games like 1-1 if the game is decided from an early time disadvantage and there's by far not enough moves for the winning side to checkmate. For classical games, I don't see a point anyways, just play without increment if you must ... B) it was implemented with artificial lag because they didn't want to risk what could happen if they implement it in the way of instant time subtraction (which would be a must if this were a serious thing). Also mobile app players had the decrement cancelled, which additionally spoiled the fun.

moralisconundrum

#5

The point of increments it to increase the number of moves in a game to decide it. Decrements (from the April fool's joke), instead, enforces a move limit, which goes completely against the idea.

Toscani

edited

#6

My point is the clock on the internet has become a variant of chess. So keep making more clock variants.
We already have lag, compensation time, lag switchers, speedy players, clock flaggers, ultrabullet, etc....

Now maybe this time variant was only for fun on April fools day, but it did generate an idea. It brain stormed into a clock variant that starts with sudden-death, but the clock gets corrected every 30 moves.

Put the feature in the Casual Quick Lobby: Implement increment time and decrement time on the 30th move.
The feature can stop when the clocks equalizes. It could be reactivated after move 60 and stop again after the clocks equalize again. Flagging could be avoided every 30 moves.

Chess is only about stressing for an end game. An end game made by completing the game, not by completing the clock.
It's not called clock chess, it's positional chess.

Do you want to remember GM flaggers or GM quality gamers? Think about it. Have we finished polluting the database with poor quality games? I think not. Seems like the clock is more important than quality chess.

Should a player be allowed to take enormous amounts of time?
... Same question inversed ...
Should a player be allowed to remove pondering time?
If the speed shark loses, does that not sandbag a rating?
A rating system is affected by sandbaggers, lag switchers and so forth.

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/d20fbfa6-1797-485e-8956-237d15c6c8cf?s=u

My point is the clock on the internet has become a variant of chess. So keep making more clock variants. We already have lag, compensation time, lag switchers, speedy players, clock flaggers, ultrabullet, etc.... Now maybe this time variant was only for fun on April fools day, but it did generate an idea. It brain stormed into a clock variant that starts with sudden-death, but the clock gets corrected every 30 moves. Put the feature in the Casual Quick Lobby: Implement increment time and decrement time on the 30th move. The feature can stop when the clocks equalizes. It could be reactivated after move 60 and stop again after the clocks equalize again. Flagging could be avoided every 30 moves. Chess is only about stressing for an end game. An end game made by completing the game, not by completing the clock. It's not called clock chess, it's positional chess. Do you want to remember GM flaggers or GM quality gamers? Think about it. Have we finished polluting the database with poor quality games? I think not. Seems like the clock is more important than quality chess. Should a player be allowed to take enormous amounts of time? ... Same question inversed ... Should a player be allowed to remove pondering time? If the speed shark loses, does that not sandbag a rating? A rating system is affected by sandbaggers, lag switchers and so forth. https://www.perplexity.ai/search/d20fbfa6-1797-485e-8956-237d15c6c8cf?s=u

airfloo

#7

Going with @Cedur216 here, pretty funny for april-fools but not very sophisticated in overall-design. If however they managed to create a more "fair" version of it, the idea could become strong. Though, I have to admit, that I am completely unable to think of a way to make it better. So up until there is somebody that can actually do so I hope this remains a one-hit-wonder.

Katoh1

#8

Decrement time controls? No thanks. Chess was supposed to be a thinking game, it's bad enough that today many people play these meaningless 1 minute or 30 secs games which usually end up decided by whoever moves around the mouse faster. Now people even want decrement time controls!? That would turn chess into a circus.

ar9415

#9

@Toscani said in #3:

Increment adds time and decrement subtracts time. It might be better if it was applied after 30 moves.

The player with less time would get incremented time and the player that had more time gets the decremented time controls. Both increment and decrement ends when both time controls equalize. It's a bell curve to make everyone pass on time.

School exam bell curves exist, so why not in chess time controls?

@Toscani said in #3: > Increment adds time and decrement subtracts time. It might be better if it was applied after 30 moves. > > The player with less time would get incremented time and the player that had more time gets the decremented time controls. Both increment and decrement ends when both time controls equalize. It's a bell curve to make everyone pass on time. > > School exam bell curves exist, so why not in chess time controls?

Nordlandia

#10

Even hourglass is better, I would say