Default time controls with 5 sec/move • page 1/1 • Lichess Feedback • lichess.org

I think that default time controls for the games should be with a few sec/per move.
For example:
5 5 instead of 5 0
3 2 instead of 3 0

I think this should be default in lichess app, and in tournaments. Playing without extra time per move at the end of the game is not chess it's mouse clicking game.

I think that default time controls for the games should be with a few sec/per move. For example: 5 5 instead of 5 0 3 2 instead of 3 0 I think this should be default in lichess app, and in tournaments. Playing without extra time per move at the end of the game is not chess it's mouse clicking game.

jonesmh

#2

Time management is a part of the game.
Adjusting the defaults for just one person would be immoral. Conduct a poll and only request again if the majority agrees.

Time management is a part of the game. Adjusting the defaults for just one person would be immoral. Conduct a poll and only request again if the majority agrees.

Daeburon

#3

increment is no better. the end of the game just becomes pretty much the same meaningless mouse clicking game moves, because players want to "bank" extra time.

at least with no increment, the game is guaranteed to end, and you know there is a maximum amount of time you will be playing. with increment, you could be playing for infinity as some guy just keeps making moves and trying to stay awake longer than you. some guy did that in one of the first world tournaments, and hes the reason we have chess clocks to begin with. adding increment was a step backwards.

increment is no better. the end of the game just becomes pretty much the same meaningless mouse clicking game moves, because players want to "bank" extra time. at least with no increment, the game is guaranteed to end, and you know there is a maximum amount of time you will be playing. with increment, you could be playing for infinity as some guy just keeps making moves and trying to stay awake longer than you. some guy did that in one of the first world tournaments, and hes the reason we have chess clocks to begin with. adding increment was a step backwards.

Toadofsky

#4

#1 I don't object.

I suggest something easier to agree to: change lobby seeks

5+0 -> 5+1
10+0 -> 10+2

#1 I don't object. I suggest something easier to agree to: change lobby seeks * 5+0 -> 5+1 * 10+0 -> 10+2

TFA

#5

What can fly without wings?

cheddarman1

#6

@Daeburon Looks like someone doesn't know the 50 move rule

Alayan

#7

Games without increment push you to play even more quickly, because getting a superior position while being down on time will lead to your opponent trying to flag you. In an increment game, trying to flag the opponent while in a lost postion is much riskier.

For the same average time per game, I'd bet that increment leads to better quality play.

Now if people like no-increment games they can play bullet all they want, but having the only default "rapid" TC on the homepage be without increment, and having only a tiny part of blitz tournaments with increments is frustrating for players like me (I mostly play 5+3 but I'd be happy with 3+2 in tournaments).

Games without increment push you to play even more quickly, because getting a superior position while being down on time will lead to your opponent trying to flag you. In an increment game, trying to flag the opponent while in a lost postion is much riskier. For the same average time per game, I'd bet that increment leads to better quality play. Now if people like no-increment games they can play bullet all they want, but having the only default "rapid" TC on the homepage be without increment, and having only a tiny part of blitz tournaments with increments is frustrating for players like me (I mostly play 5+3 but I'd be happy with 3+2 in tournaments).

andreypz

#8

I think with time increments an overall quality of the game increases dramatically. For sure this is true for me. I'm sure lichess has data to verify and quantify this assumption for all players.

Conducting the poll would be great. Is this possible to do here? I do not see that. However, I suspect that the result of the poll would be in favour of no-increment. Not because it's better, but because it is a default. And the change can be uncomfortable for people (this was also the case for me, when I switched).
Personally, I think larger increment is better. For example "3 10" I think is better than "5 3".

In any case, I think "an experiment" on lichess would be great, when the "3 0" and "5 0" are removed from a "Quick pairing" page and replaced with "3 10" and "5 5".

I think with time increments an overall quality of the game increases dramatically. For sure this is true for me. I'm sure lichess has data to verify and quantify this assumption for all players. Conducting the poll would be great. Is this possible to do here? I do not see that. However, I suspect that the result of the poll would be in favour of no-increment. Not because it's better, but because it is a default. And the change can be uncomfortable for people (this was also the case for me, when I switched). Personally, I think larger increment is better. For example "3 10" I think is better than "5 3". In any case, I think "an experiment" on lichess would be great, when the "3 0" and "5 0" are removed from a "Quick pairing" page and replaced with "3 10" and "5 5".

lollycopter

#9

It would be better to keep the quick pairing options the same but to add a second set of time controls in the custom section. As per the OP's request, there's already 5+3 and 3+2 available as two of the eight quick pair options. Personally, I prefer 15+15 and 10+0.