From: jdd@engr.ucf.edu (Joseph Dumas)
Subject: Re: Time Controls: what is best?
Organization: engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:00:22 GMT

In <1992Dec17.084229.4662@admin1.memst.edu> gpylant@admin1.memst.edu writes:
>Now comes the question: what is the best time control for a 5ss ?

>At first 50 moves in 2 hours was ok, but near the end of the tournament
>there was always a big delay in starting the last round.  Out of towners
>were wanting to wrap things up and get home.
>
>Then came the advent of 40 moves in 100 minutes.  This help somewhat, but
>the old trouble kept creeping back ( some players always get in time pressure).
>The main difficulty in a weekend swiss is the three rounds on Saturday.
>Most of the schedules were the same: 9-2-7 on Sat. and 9-2 on Sunday. Some
>
>In the last few years more tourneys have sudden death time controls to speed
>things up.  Personally, I like SD only if the first Control is slower, say
>30 moves in 90 minutes or even 40 in 2, but with 9-2-7 format 5 hours for each
>round is hard to come by.  In the Mid-South Open in November we tried a new
>approach: 40 in 90 minutes then SD in one hour.  This guarantees that no game
>will last over 5 hours and all rounds can start on time.  The tourney did 
>run more efficiently, but a few players were upset about playing faster.

This is a tough issue, one that I have faced as a director (of just a
few small events, not nearly as many as you) and of course as a player.
I am one of the players who likes long time controls, the longer the
better (I always seem to get into time trouble anyway).  I like 50/2 or
better even 45/2, but the problem there with only 5 hours between rounds
is that you have to have a 30 minute secondary time control.  Ugh!
Sounds like speed chess to me (which is fine in its place, just not in a
rated game).  I dislike sudden-death time controls in any case, but when
you have to get three rounds completed in one day, that is almost the
only way to go.  (Else you have to *hope* that none of the games goes
over 60-70 moves or so....)  Given that situation, I would probably pick
40/90 or 35/90 followed by SD/1 as the "least of evils".  40/90
translates to 2.25 minutes per move, which is not too much quicker than
50/2 (2.4 minutes per move).  35/90 is actually a more relaxed pace than
50/2 (2.57 minutes per move).  And, well, if you have to have sudden
death, then 60 minutes is not too bad; assuming few games go beyond 70
moves, this translates to 30/1 or 35/1 (2.0 or 1.71 minutes per move);
kinda quick for my taste, but remember, you're in an endgame by now --
it should be somewhat easier to calculate with fewer pieces on the
board.

Maybe you should ask yourself:  is it really necessary to have three
rounds on Saturday?  The Friday night option is one way to go.  Another
thing to consider is just making it a four round tourney instead of
five.  A lot of 5 round tourneys don't have clear winners anyway due to
draws.  Maybe you should choose quality over quantity and try some 4
round events.  (Admittedly this would be affected somewhat by the nature
of the tournament; is it a championship event or just a weekend "fun and
a few bucks" thing?)  Why not poll the players at your next event or
club meeting and see what they think.

Anyway, I wish I had your problem around here.  I am too busy right now
finishing up my Ph.D. to be able to organize and direct tournaments, and
the only ones held around here tend to be 40/1, SD/30 or G/1, or the
like.  Yuk.  Rated speed chess.  40/90 sounds slow to me!  No wonder I
never play OTB anymore.

Joe
-- 
    ---------->  Joe is jdd@engr.ucf.edu (Joseph Dumas) <----------
"How about a nice game of Chess?"
"No, let's play Global Thermonuclear War."
"Fine."