From: cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand)
Newsgroups: rec.games.go
Subject: Re: etiquette of time on IGS
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:14:59 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <1992Oct8.151226.20505@klaava.Helsinki.FI> olounela@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Olli Lounela) writes:
>In article <JULIANR.92Oct7171147@tay.aisb.ed.ac.uk> julianr@aisb.ed.ac.uk (Julian Richardson) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct7.071149.27432@klaava.Helsinki.FI> tolvanen@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Martti Tolvanen) writes:
>>>    Just my $0.02 worth: I think adding time is justified when there are
>>>    network problems that steal time, but otherwise one should stick to the
>>>    time limit given at the start of the game.  If you can't play fast
>>>    enough, you lose, and maybe that'll motivate you to play faster or
>>>    choose a more appropriate time limit next time. 
>>> 
>>I think this is rather severe. In an informal game, the point of the time limit
>>is to encourage the players to play quickly enough.  Personally, if I am
>>playing a (real live) friendly game and my flag drops, I usually continue with
>>the game, even though I may already have lost in some sense. I would be
>>inclined to adopt the same policy on the IGS.
>
>I would tend to support Martti in this.  Once the time limit is agreed
>upon, I think it should stand.  If you can't play fast, then make the
>limits longer. 
>
>The point here is a different one.  A lightning game is something that
>(IMHO) bears little resemblance to 'real' game, friendly or otherwise. 
>If one is willing to sacrifice thinking for speed, so be it, and if not,
>then don't play lightning.

Agreed.

>The only exception I heartily approve are the delays caused by other
>things than the player.  Net delays, line speeds, computer crashes and
>all such; I for one cannot guarantee that I can play in 10 mins plus
>byo-yomi, for any time the netlag may hit and cause a freeze of up to 10
>mins (the Trans-Atlantic line seems far from optimal at times).  For the
>same reason I'm generally forced to avoid byo-yomi altogether. 
>

Again I agree, except that I've never lost a game due to net delays. My
opinion: choose whatever time limit you want, and if net delays or other
reasons eat your time, ask for addtime.

>And one more thing: I think that the friendliness of a game has nothing
>to do with stretching the rules and/or terms of play.  I really
>disapprove of several practises in the IGS, most notably that of asking
>one's opponent to undo moves that actually aren't typos.  

Here here!

>One should
>think *BEFORE* playing, and visualize the result in one's head.  The
>same applies to normal games: I never allow my opponent to take back a
>move, except in some special cases (eg. teaching an absolute beginner). 
>The friendliness of a game becomes not from these things but from the
>attitude towards the game and the opponent.  I can be friendly without
>breaking the rules. 

Very well put.
-- 
-Tero Sand
  EMail: cust_ts@cc.helsinki.fi     Snail mail: Auroran Sairaala os. 6-1
  (if that doesn't work, try                    Nordenskioldinkatu 20
   custts@cc.helsinki.fi)                       00250 Helsinki 25, Finland
Newsgroups: rec.games.go