Free online Chess server. Play Chess now in a clean interface. No registration, no ads, no plugin required. Play Chess with the computer, friends or random opponents.
Create a gameTournamentSimultaneous exhibitions
Chess basicsPuzzlesPracticeCoordinatesStudyCoaches
Lichess TVCurrent gamesStreamersBroadcasts (beta)Video library
PlayersTeamsForumQuestions & Answers
Analysis boardOpening explorerBoard editorImport gameAdvanced search
Sign in
  1. Forum
  2. Lichess Feedback
  3. [Feature request] Increments of less than a second

Hi all, how about increments of ½ or ¼ second per move? Considering the current popular conventions of hyperbullet on lichess, +1 second per move seems like a fossil from the dial-up times. Whereas ½+1 make little sense to play for hyperbullet aficionados, ½+½ and ¼+¼ seem like cool and playable time controls to me. And lichess would be a world leader! Let me know what you think.

makes sense. I'd like 1/4 + 1/4.

Nice idea Jokido i agree that +1 is excessive

Great idea here

Thanks! I should have mentioned, one problem with this proposal is of course that people are used to flagging in such time controls, and may feel that implementing small increments ruins our flag-chess experience. But, anticipating this objection, this initial aversion against increments may very well be due to the one second minimum we are all used to...


That is a good idea. But faster internet is needed

Make your case using verified lichess vote.

Vote with your lichess identity for issues that matter to you, like introducing increments less than a second.

I opened a question for the OP, feel free to vote:

I think I'd also like 3+¼ more than I currently like 3+0 and 3+1. Perhaps +.1 and +.2 could be possible too. Any more pros/cons? Any enthusiasm?

The only disadvantage of this may be 'mouse masters' playing 1/4 +1/4 rated variants games and dominate the leaderboard.

That's why variants ratings should be different for ultrabullet,bullet,rapid,blitz,classical .

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.