1+1 quick pairing option

First of all, I have provided reasoning for x+1. You have not provided reasoning for x+0 or x+x. All you have done is say I can't prove what people prefer. That is true. I cannot. What I can do is provide a reasoning for an ideal time control: x+1. My arguments are stating that x+1 is ideal and therefore superior to all other time controls.

You said: "In my experience, most bullet players rather look down on playing with increment since it kinda destroys the whole element of flagging."...... Is that a statistical experience or are you just assuming what other people think? Have they tried 30 seconds +1? 10 seconds +1? x+1 chess does not "kinda destroys the whole element of flagging" to me at all. I guess I wasn't included in that poll. I guess I didn't make that statistic chart. If my opinion was not counted, and only the opinions of people who have not played x+1 bullet chess are counted in this statistic, is that statistic accurate in your opinion? And if so why?

Here is a little analogy for x+1: If I don't buy a lottery ticket, I will never win, my chances are zero. If I buy a lottery ticket, I have 1 chance of winning, let's say 1 out of 14 000 000. If I by 2 lottery tickets, I have 2 chances out of 14 000 000. If I buy 10 tickets, I have 10 chances out of 14 000 000. Now, I ask you, is the value of the first ticket equal to the value of all the other tickets purchased subsequently? The answer is no. Because the first ticket improved your chances from zero to 1 out of 14 000 000 which is significant. The other tickets do not improve your chances of winning significantly because of the cost to chances of winning ratio. The first ticket purchases an opportunity while the other tickets merely increases that opportunity by an extremely and practically insignificant margin. It can be argued that the extra tickets are a waste of money. In the end, the day you win the lottery, 1 in 14 000 000 didn't mean anything, and in this way, +1 matters more than +0 and +x.

I'm not a mathematician, I'm just being realistic.

@poper69 said in #11:
> Is that a statistical experience or are you just assuming what other people think?

Please apply this to yourself.

Please explain how this applies to me. He is the one making statements based on assumptions, and then claiming I require statistics and polls to make a point. He's imposing a double standard on me. Maybe that's fair to you because you don't agree with me.

Bottom line, x+0 is restrictive time chess: it is devoid of the virtues of free time chess, x+>1 is free time chess: it is devoid of the virtues of restrictive time chess, x+1 preserves the virtues of restrictive time chess and free time chess all at once.

x+1 is the best of both world's in one and therefore the ideal.

You are right this is my opinion, however the arguments I have presented are objective.

You are entitled to disagree subjectively, until you have provided objective arguments.

@pepellou said in #12:
> Please apply this to yourself.
You must be so impressed by yourself.

@poper69 said in #13:
> Please explain how this applies to me.

IMHO it's applicable to your first statement "I think most 1+0 players would prefer to play 1+1 if they could" and all the subsequent justifications of it (or "objective arguments" as you call them). I honestly think your statements really fit into "assuming what other people think".

It's very clear we're not on the same page so I won't bother you more.
I was truly curious when I asked my question in #5 but I'm sorry to see that road is not useful to you.

Good luck.

I want to thank you all for indulging me in this discussion. While x+0 and x+>1 chess is quite good, I believe that together we were able to extrapolate the key points that show why x+1 chess is ideal and therefore superior to x+0 and x+>1.

I understand that most of you disagree with this conclusion, but I believe that the right people will agree if they truly consider the question and put my theory to the test.

Also thank you for challenging me even though we could not find arguments as to why x+0 or x+>1 was equal or better than x+1 as my debating skills have sharpened as a result. This discussion could not have happened without you.

Thank you for your time.

Whether or not any x+y is the best time control, I do feel the need more and more to play 1+1 or 1+2.
Having some kind of way to customize the time controls for me would be a nice addition.
I am more than happy to accept the wait times (for 1+2 I barely wait for 10 seconds).
These being said, maybe these would work:
- configure any of the defaults to something else
- have some different highlight on your first page choices to let you know you changed them.
Side-note: maybe the number of active players and games can be also computed for the default time controls.
Would it be better to go to github and create an issue than just discussing here?