The false promise and stupidity of the +1 part in 2+1

I see a lot of arguments along the lines of games becoming nonsense chaos in no-increment timecontrols. My expereince is opposite. And it is driving me crazy. I don't have a good option when when I'm too high strung for 5+0 (but that I will leave to the end).

So what do I see when I'm playing 2+1? I have like 20 seconds left, the opponent 3 seconds. Well they would sooner lose on time than being mated, so they start making random moves to rack up time. They are now up to like 8 seconds. But me using my time responsibly, down to 10. So I;m like why the f is this game still going on, and then I realize... the sheer amount of unfairness, the advantage my opponent accumulated by basically not playing anymore dawns on me. I lose like 98% of the games when that get into this situation. Maybe that's on me, but it doesn't make it less stupid.

I see chess as a game of resources, a strategy game that consist of more than just the moves. You play the role of converting time into move quality. Overspend, and you will likely earn a winning position, but you will end up running out of your resources and lose. Underspend, and you will have a lot of time saved up, like a rich country without a military being invaded. You lose.

A delicate balance that adds so much depth. And this ruins it.

So why do I moan about it? Why not just play 1+0? 1+0 and 2+x are 2 very different worlds. Faar too fast for me. Basically a game of premoves, for a large part, a real extreme that's too much for me.

So why not create 2+0 games? Same answer as anybody else on the internet. The default pools are where like 95% of the players are. I want a pool. Everyobody wants a pool.

I know it's not gonna change, probably a million other people wanted a million other default timecontrols. But the discussion is valid.

Maybe increments make more sense in longer games, where you want to keep a classical game's endgame classical-ish. I'll give you that. But for 2+1 and similar, the +1 part is never going to be anything but the one thing that turns me away from it after 2-3 games. Despite the fact that 2 minutes is great for fast but not yet crazy chess.

Thanks for hearing me out

just play rapid at that point

@Cs1xlly I assume you are saying play fast, not switch timecontrols.

A very good point. Just play fast. Well in a game where premoves are allowed it does not matter how fast you play. And making premoves is worth it for the opponent, better risk getting into a lost position than run out of time.

Actually, thinking about it, this natural choice, trying to play fast as a useless reaction to the opponent's time going up, it might be one factor why I lose in these situations, in some games. But what else am I supposed to do? Lose on time myself, when I see I already have less time than the opponent who should have already lost?

(Admittedly, my frustration is another factor).

Can premoves be disabled? That would at least partially mitigate this issue, even if it would only be plastering over. But I dont think they can.

@inalansyen said in #1:
> So what do I see when I'm playing 2+1? I have like 20 seconds left, the opponent 3 seconds. Well they would sooner lose on time than being mated, so they start making random moves to rack up time. They are now up to like 8 seconds. But me using my time responsibly, down to 10. So I;m like why the f is this game still going on, and then I realize... the sheer amount of unfairness, the advantage my opponent accumulated by basically not playing anymore dawns on me. I lose like 98% of the games when that get into this situation. Maybe that's on me, but it doesn't make it less stupid.

Not sure if this is a serious post. If your opponent is beating you by making random moves then honestly you need to look into the quality of your own play, as you have time to think about how to punish them. Using time responsibly doesn't mean letting your clock run down a certain amount, it means using that time to think and play better

If you are venting over a specific game that's fine, as we all have those games where the opponent who's low on the clock somehow swindles a win, but what you are describing is not the fault of increment, premoves, or opponent. It's your own moves that can't beat random ones

If you cannot win against random moves, what makes you think you deserve a win?

Why do you think your time deserves different handling than theirs?

It all makes no sense to me.

2+1 is bullet. Period.

If you want longer games, just pick a time control which offers that. Problem solved. If it's not within the presets, you just create a manual challenge. Or look for a tournament - there's many around with all types of time controls.

I see the point when people play bullshit moves right from the start in order to flag you after 100 moves or so, and they have dead lost positions from move 5 on. But in normal games, where they are short on time... what do you expect them to do? Lose on time? The only way to survive is by gaining some time on the clock... nothing stops you from doing the same.

@inalansyen said in #3:
> I assume you are saying play fast, not switch timecontrols.

no switch time control

'I have like 20 seconds left, the opponent 3 seconds. Well they would sooner lose on time than being mated, so they start making random moves to rack up time. They are now up to like 8 seconds. But me using my time responsibly, down to 10. So I;m like why the f is this game still going on, and then I realize... '

If you're running out of time at 2+1, why would you prefer 2+0? The reason your opponents are speeding up is premove and they'll do it even more if there's no increment.
If it really bothers you, create 2+0 games and you'll still find opponents.

I need + 70 just to remember I'm playing chess

I don't see why the +1 is needed, already I watch my bullet games now with no increment where my opponent with time expired has 1.3" added to their clock.

I understand...lag

@morphyms1817 said in #9:
> I don't see why the +1 is needed, already I watch my bullet games now with no increment where my opponent with time expired has 1.3" added to their clock.
>
> I understand...lag

This is not how lag compensation works.