The following is the FIDE time control for Rapid/Blitz
The Laws to be followed will be as set out in the Laws of Chess, Appendices A and B. All “Rapidplay” games will be eligible for rating. That is, each player must have at least 15 minutes, but less than 60 minutes thinking time; or the time allotted + 60 times any increment or delay is at least 15 minutes, but less than 60 minutes for each player. Only those “blitz” games where each player has at least five minutes, but less than 15 minutes, after adjustment for any increment or delay mode, will be rated. Thus, the time control of 3 minutes plus 2 second increment or all the moves in 5 minutes is acceptable. Both players must have the same allotted time.
Is there a move to move the USCF Quick chess time control to be in line with the above.
I believe that a lot more players would be playing in G/30 events if it did not affect their regular rating?
Since the overwhelming majority of Game/30 events involve young players, I think removing them from the USCF regular rating system would be very unpopular in the scholastic community.
Just within the past few years there was a change to make G/25;d5 dual rated. That was after significant discussion and lobbying in favor of doing so as a way to allow adults to have those games affect their regular rating.
After that was done we changed our quick-rated quads from G/29;d3 to G/25;d3.
It is probably also unreasonable to expect USCF to accept FIDE’s arbitrary limits on what constitute Blitz, Rapids/QR or regular rated events over USCF’s (equally arbitrary) limits.
Maybe it doesn’t make much sense to you, but for as long as G/30 has been USCF ratable (since the early 90’s) it has been a regular ratable time control.
It is also the most frequent time control used in USCF rated events.
That’s fine and dandy, but as Mr. Nolan pointed out above, GAME/30 has been regular rated since before there was a quick rating system.
I won’t play that fast, and I know other players who won’t play that fast, but I have yet to see a good reason to keep it out of the regular rating system.
Moreover, at the time Game/30 was made a (regular) ratable time control, the scholastic boom had not yet occurred, so the majority of players at any time control were adults.
But the scholastic community jumped on it, which is why a large measure of the Game 30 events are scholastic. IIRC, the early use of Game 30 was sporadic. I know that in many areas, the tradition of two day tournaments with longer time controls continued to have sway. Game 30 was more experimental in nature to see if people would play in that type of event. It had its problems, too, before the pure Allegro time control converted to delay once digital clocks expanded in use. Now more and more tournaments have fast time controls.
Did Game 30 help to cause the boom in scholastic chess or did the boom in scholastic chess lead to the greater use of Game 30? Game 30 certainly allows more games to be held in one day. It is a boon to organizers of scholastic tournaments who have limited times for use of a site. The popularity of this type of rapid play will doubtless continue.
Game 30 is fine for helping to identify talent. It gives the kids a fun way to play chess. It appeals to children with short attention spans. However, I see a lot of dropouts when kids do not get better or their ratings stay low. Some kids age out of it, feeling the need for longer time controls to do better thinking. As a coach, it is frustrating to go over fragmented game scores, games that start well, and then lose consistency leading to clock bashing endings. Too many better positions and even positions are lost, which lead the kid to think he is playing worse than he really is. Game 30 tournaments are a double edged sword.
As an adult, when Game 30 tournaments started to appear, I played in a bunch of them. I was much younger then and could handle the stress. Over time, it killed my rating. Today, I try to avoid playing in most of them, as I like my blood pressure to be stable. However, if Game 30 keeps being pushed and the traditional type of tournament time controls go away, then I will have to consider retiring from tournament play. I believe many other adults would come to the same decision; that would not be good for the federation.
When G/30 first came around, without all that time delay stuff, it was a pure and popular format for players who knew what they were getting into. The tournament directors were overworked by having to decide if the games were drawn or was this an opportunist trying to flag his opponent.
Since game/ 30 allows more rounds in a day for tournaments it has been a popular format. Unless we are going to return to the days of repeating endless time controls (also designed to “flag” a player through exhaustion in some cases) and God forbid…adjournments (just let Houdini decide on the spot first). Also, the original poster asked for input from players over 2200 on this issue. I am not one of these players but he should safely assume that masters who compete at this speed are no dummies, this after all, is how they became rated 2200.
I have seen quite stunning speed chess games played and I have seen some of the most hideous chess ever played at a relatively glacial pace under the repeating time control formats. I wish there was some sort of system available for quality points for chess games like those attached to a GPA. I think if this ever occured more artists would return to the board. And yes…Get rid of dual rating. Quick should be quick, regular should be regular and never the two should meet.
I must confess, I don’t understand why adults are up in arms about G/30 events being rated. G/30 was regular-rated before the QC system - and there were G/30 events before the scholastic boom. I directed a lot of them, in fact.
If one doesn’t like the time control, one shouldn’t play it. That dislike in and of itself is not, IMHO, a sufficient reason for eradicating it as regular rated.
He’s probably in the minority, then. Our data suggests that when organizers schedule events that are just below the dual ratable threshold (for example G/25;d4), the turnout is usually lower than if the event is dual ratable.
What is hard to find are non-rated Game 30 events. Or pretty much any unrated tournament. My first tournaments were unrated 30 move in 30 minute tournaments at the Pittsburgh Chess Club. They were a good introduction to tournaments. A bunch of higher rated players would play for practice; they were not risking their rating at this fast pace time control. Later, with these tournament under my belt, I started playing in USCF rated tournaments.
These old 30-30’s had a one or two dollar entry fee. There were 4 rounds. It took up much of a Saturday afternoon at the club. Casual game with laughter and jibes were going on while the tournament progressed. There was a certain amount of shushing and “Shut up, we’re playing chess here!” but usually there was a degree of compromise over how much noise was acceptable. You could win a whole $8 if you won the event. If enough players were around in the evening after the tournament finished, occasionally a 5 minute tournament would be set up in a round robin format. A good player could make a whopping $15 for a whole day of play. Clubs held more non-rated events in those days. Rated tournament happened only 4 times a year.
G/30 games are kind of fun but I believe that people should be able to choose if it is to be rated as Quick or Regular. It I would choose regular than my regular rating would be used for pairing, same for quick…just a suggestion. Bob
I don’t understand this. GAME/30 has always, since it became a ratable time control, been regular rated. Thanks to John Hillery, GAME/25; D/5 became regular rated in Irvine, although one could argue that it was regular ratable all along.