Author: O. Veli
Date: 21:15:11 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2002 at 18:01:03, Stuzzi Kadent wrote: >I do not play chess tournaments, but am aware of various time controls, and the >perceived demand in the professional world (marketing, if not playing) for >shorter time controls. That was what FIDE president based his idea on but instead of promoting rpaid chess, he shortened the tournament time limits. Intel and PCA had a nice run of 25 minute games that attracted media attention. There were also game commentaries on tv. Rapid and blitz chess can get the attention of the general public, but that is it. You simply cannot decrease the level of play by decreasing the time limits for serious tournaments. A nice example would be the last European championships where games were full of errors. Tv is not the media for chess, internet is better suited to it. >I wonder if the advance of computers is encroaching on the attitude of >organisers- to paraphrase: "Well, we know that computers are the ultimate >masters of chess, so striving for ultimate quality from these games is not an >issue, only that we attract strong players". I think the main attraction in a tournament is to see the battle between humans. When computers will be very stronger than people, we will not see a single game close enough to Kasparov-Topalov and such because the computer will not give its opponent the circumstances that lead to that wonderful combination. >How many hours can we expect chess players to sit at a board? Is chess at the >old time controls of 40 in 120 minutes simply out of tune with the modern world? I think a 7-hour sitting time is almost perfect, such as 40/120, 20/60 and then G/30.
This page took 0.44 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.