What do you think about a time control with a sixty second increment, such as G/90;inc60? (and if you are wondering if the popular digital clocks that do increment can handle a sixty second increment, they all can except the Leap clocks which only go up to 59 seconds)
What’s the point of having 60 seconds of increment?
I would have to say that a 60-second increment would be a crashing bore, like a main time of 20 moves in 360 minutes. I would probably never participate in such an event.
Bill Smythe
I would hate to be the guy living on increment who needs to use the bathroom. His opponent could torture him forever.
I once had to reset a clock that was set for Game 90 hours, with 60 second increment. At a recent event, one of the kids had his clock set by his dad at Game 30 hours with 5 second delay.
I think that is very common with some clocks. Excalibur comes to mind.
Alex Relyea
i60 was used in Fischer-Spassky II. Nothing inherently wrong with it if you’re willing to accept the increased risk of an over-time game that comes with a longer increment.
I like i60 better than d10.
EDIT: Then again, I like conjunctivitis better than d10.
I have no problem with it, and it may even alleviate some of the problems of “living on the increment”. I think a secondary base time does that better, though.
If we’re targeting a five hour game, I like it better than G/120;+30 but not as much as 40/90, SD/30;+30.
Alex Relyea
The Excaliburs I’ve seen only have minutes (three digits), not hours, so I’ve seen 200 minutes instead of the 120 minutes needed for two hours, while seeing a nearby Chronos set for 1:20 instead of 2:00. I’ve seen a number of Saiteks set for 30, 45 or 90 hours, so I’m guessing it was a Saitek.
The question still remains: What does 60 increment give you that 30 increment doesn’t give you?
Longer games.
Really? For G/90;inc60 players would have two hours and ten minutes for forty moves and two hours and thirty minutes for sixty moves which really isn’t much different than the time players get for forty and sixty moves with the popular time control 40/120,SD/30;d10.
Having two time controls often just splits up when a player is “living on the increment”. Instead of “living on the increment” at just the end of the game for say twenty moves, you “live on the increment” near move forty for ten moves and at the end of the game for ten moves. Some of the “living on the increment” wouldn’t occur at all if you just used a single time control.
Less time pressure
I think knowing they’ve got 60 seconds for each move might actually lead to more time pressure (ie, a player having used up virtually all of his time except what he gets from each increment), because they don’t see as much need to conserve their initial block of time.
I see that with five second delay.
Alex Relyea
This is true sometimes but I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages
Yes, which is one reason why a longer delay is better (and a longer increment is even better)
Then why stop at 60 seconds? Why not 4 minutes of increment per move, that way each player always has at least 4 minutes of thinking time for every move!
Who cares if games take 8-10 hours?
Now you’re just being ridiculous. There has to be a balance between mitigating time pressure and making it so games don’t last too long. I think sixty seconds makes for a good balance. Also, most of the popular digital clocks can’t support an increment above sixty seconds.
Here is where we part company. With a delay of 30 seconds, the most thinking time (or rest time) a player in time trouble can have is 30 seconds. With increment you can theoretically boost the time available for important moves.
Alex Relyea
I agree with you that increment is better. I’m just saying a delay longer than five seconds is better than five second delay and isn’t awful like you and Brennan Price claim (and I say this having directed and played in tournaments with both five second and longer delays)
Isn’t the point of delay and increment the ability to basically win you won game and not lose on time? 30 second increment gives the player time to keep score all the way through?
But 60 second is actually taking away from the player his or her choice of time management and forcing a new paradigm on them.