History of Time Control • page 1/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

I know this is a touchy subject for some people but it's become something of an elephant in the room and difficult to ignore. Chess has been moving toward faster game play for more than a century. It's nothing new - nor is it exclusively an internet phenomenon. While the classical time format results in relatively higher quality play, the classical format itself has seen significant changes over the past century.

Today, classical chess is no longer the dominant form of competition and it no longer reigns supreme in terms of quality. Engines are now capable of generating games of much higher precision and correspondence games allow for even deeper contemplation. So it's only natural to inquire about the future role of classical chess... but only after considering the history of time controls over the past 150 years.

In the mid-1800s, the average time to complete a game (prior to time controls) was 9 hours.
In the 1860s, the average time to complete a game (with time controls) was 5 hours.
In the 1880s, players had 2 hours to make 30 moves.
In the 1920s, players had 2 hours to make 36 moves.
In the 1940s, players had 2.5 hours to make 40 moves.
Since the 1980s, players have 2 hours to make 40 moves.
In the 1920s, clock technology allowed for blitz to become popular in casual games with young players.
By the 1980s, 25 minute rapid games became popular in clubs. Soon after, rapid was used to decide professional matches in the event of a tie.
In the late 1980s, Fischer invented a clock that allowed for time increments and the first rapid championships were held amongst top masters.
By the mid-late 1990s, internet technology allowed more players to play faster controls at greater distances.
The 2000's saw the rise in popularity of extremely fast time controls of less than 3 minutes. Many as fast as 1-minute and some even less than 30 seconds.

Most chess games worldwide are now played on the internet and relatively few of them are classical games. Today, blitz is faster than ever before and the average rapid game is now close to half the average time of the first "active chess" games played in the 1980s.

So what exactly is happening? Some people cringe and see this trend as a degregation in the quality of chess being played - but it's difficult to ignore that the quality of chess has steadily increased over the past 150 years as the time to play a game has steadily decreased. The truth is that more people are playing better quality chess today than ever before and they are playing it faster than than ever before.

So what say you? Has chess really been hurt by the rise in popularity of fast time controls?

I know this is a touchy subject for some people but it's become something of an elephant in the room and difficult to ignore. Chess has been moving toward faster game play for more than a century. It's nothing new - nor is it exclusively an internet phenomenon. While the classical time format results in relatively higher quality play, the classical format itself has seen significant changes over the past century. Today, classical chess is no longer the dominant form of competition and it no longer reigns supreme in terms of quality. Engines are now capable of generating games of much higher precision and correspondence games allow for even deeper contemplation. So it's only natural to inquire about the future role of classical chess... but only after considering the history of time controls over the past 150 years. - In the mid-1800s, the average time to complete a game (prior to time controls) was 9 hours. - In the 1860s, the average time to complete a game (with time controls) was 5 hours. - In the 1880s, players had 2 hours to make 30 moves. - In the 1920s, players had 2 hours to make 36 moves. - In the 1940s, players had 2.5 hours to make 40 moves. - Since the 1980s, players have 2 hours to make 40 moves. - In the 1920s, clock technology allowed for blitz to become popular in casual games with young players. - By the 1980s, 25 minute rapid games became popular in clubs. Soon after, rapid was used to decide professional matches in the event of a tie. - In the late 1980s, Fischer invented a clock that allowed for time increments and the first rapid championships were held amongst top masters. - By the mid-late 1990s, internet technology allowed more players to play faster controls at greater distances. - The 2000's saw the rise in popularity of extremely fast time controls of less than 3 minutes. Many as fast as 1-minute and some even less than 30 seconds. Most chess games worldwide are now played on the internet and relatively few of them are classical games. Today, blitz is faster than ever before and the average rapid game is now close to half the average time of the first "active chess" games played in the 1980s. So what exactly is happening? Some people cringe and see this trend as a degregation in the quality of chess being played - but it's difficult to ignore that the quality of chess has steadily increased over the past 150 years as the time to play a game has steadily decreased. The truth is that more people are playing better quality chess today than ever before and they are playing it faster than than ever before. So what say you? Has chess really been hurt by the rise in popularity of fast time controls?

clutchnutz

#2

I should clarify, that when I say the quality of chess today is higher than ever before, that doesn't imply that the quality of a blitz or bullet game today is better than a classical game from the past. I am simply saying that the general popularity of faster games is correlated with a general increase in the quality of game play. Comparisons of games between two different time periods should still be of the same time format. In other words, blitz players today are generally stronger than blitz players of the past. Classical players today are generally stronger than classical players of the past.

tpr

#3

People have more knowledge of openings, middle game plans, endgames, so they have less need to think.
Engine cheating is a huge factor.
Over the board we probably should shift to rapid and interdict toilet visits during the game.
Also the draw rate is lower in rapid than in classical.
On line the best players play 1+0 bullet only because of suspected cheating at slower time controls.

People have more knowledge of openings, middle game plans, endgames, so they have less need to think. Engine cheating is a huge factor. Over the board we probably should shift to rapid and interdict toilet visits during the game. Also the draw rate is lower in rapid than in classical. On line the best players play 1+0 bullet only because of suspected cheating at slower time controls.

clutchnutz

#4

Yes, it seems that rapid is slowly becoming the new classical - at least in terms of popularity amongst top players. And I agree, it's the only way to address the problem of bathroom visits.

The only real argument for classical is game quality but as I mentioned, engines are far more precise and correspondence games allow deeper thought - so classical has lost that exclusive status. I think it's a just matter of time before classical is gradually marginalized at the top levels - including world championships.

Yes, it seems that rapid is slowly becoming the new classical - at least in terms of popularity amongst top players. And I agree, it's the only way to address the problem of bathroom visits. The only real argument for classical is game quality but as I mentioned, engines are far more precise and correspondence games allow deeper thought - so classical has lost that exclusive status. I think it's a just matter of time before classical is gradually marginalized at the top levels - including world championships.

AnDry1907

#5

здрасте накрасте ха ха🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

clutchnutz

#6

@Andry1907 xa xa xa xa

чё смиёшся а?😣😣😣

нет тут смишнова