lichess.org
Donate

Should berserking be removed from classical tournaments?

I personally feel strongly that the option to berserk should be removed from classical (10+0) tournaments. These are the only classical time controls available in daily tournaments and what it does is simply encourage blitz players to enter and much more easily win. There's just no way to compete and win if you're not going to be berserking most of your games - not just because of the point increase but because of the obvious increase in games played.

It just doesn't make sense to me that the only classical tournaments are optimized for blitz players to come in and dominate them.

Then what you also see is the top players berserking against each other and still earning 3 points even though there is no disadvantage when you both have half a clock.

I can understand a 1+0 bullet tournament where you cut your clock to 30s but doing so in these classical tournaments enters a different category of game all together.

I know the argument is that if you have 10m vs someone with 5m you have a big advantage but I think the advantage of a player who is used to and prefers shorter games being able to enter a tournament with a pool of people used to longer games, and being rewarded extra for it, is higher.

Thoughts?
The same would apply to Blitz tournaments; the Bullet specialists have a similar advantage. Like it or leave it! ;)
I think if you can beat someone with half of their clock time then it makes sense to have a points reward for that. Otherwise why do longer time controls lead to higher quality chess?
1) You still get an extra +1 if both people berserk (I know that's an argument against berserking for all time controls and not just classical)

2) I would think the progression of chess players start at classical, then move to blitz, and maybe bullet, etc. So despite ratings, I think you get blitz players entering classical tournaments, who are probably much stronger than the normal classical players, and they are already used to short clocks so they dominate. Also there are rating-capped tournaments like the U1500, U1700, etc. A player may have a low classical rating but a high blitz rating, then enter the capped classical, berserk, and basically just be playing blitz.
Yeah, I'm not so sure about the idea of removing berserking for classical altogether, but I do agree that it's a bit odd to give a point bonus when both players have berserked.

Perhaps the extra point bonus should not apply when both players berserk, or perhaps only the first player to berserk should be allowed to do so.

I've never been a huge fan of having the berserk feature at all, but I know I'm decidedly in the minority there, so... :)

I am not a fan of berserk.
The berserk player gets 3 advantages for his time handicap.
1) Het gets an extra point for a win.
2) He can play more games and gain more points in the tournament.
3) He puts pressure on his opponent, who can think less in opponent's time.
Well, far stronger players wouldn't be able show their skills if there is no berserk option. Much weaker can accomplish similar number of wins with them in same period of time specially with lucky and quick wins since winning with berserk is much harder. I think current format is fairly balanced this way.
Personally I can't berserk. It doesn't work for me. I respect people who can win in 30 seconds against competent opponents with double time.
<Comment deleted by user>

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