Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:25:41 11/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 1999 at 17:03:25, Christophe Theron wrote: >On November 12, 1999 at 12:46:20, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On November 12, 1999 at 12:31:15, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Fast chess is icky chess. The faster the programs play, the worse the quality >>>of the games. We already get enough fast chess on the internet servers. >>>Please, can't we leave it at tournament time controls? If we want more rounds, >>>let the programs play with an automatic tournament manager and run 24 hours a >>>day for as long as needed. >> >>You haven't been to one of these events yet, I think. You sit there making >>manual moves for hours, two games a day, for a thousand years. You get sick. >>You miss lunch and dinner. There is nothing more annoying that going to a place >>that has great food and ending up living on bar peanuts. >> >>The games can be sped up by a factor of two without much appreciable "quality" >>loss, and we'd have time for more rounds and/or better food. >> >>bruce > > >I 100% agree. > >If 40/2 was accepted as relevant when we had P100 computers, why would g/90 be >not good on PIII-500 or faster computers? > >I suppose 40/2 is a kind of magic number? Superstition? > > > Christophe Actually it was a 'legacy' issue. All the ACM/ICCA events were played at 40/2hr starting in 1970. The idea was to maintain the same time control, so that the 'quality' difference could be seen when looking over the games. I think 40/2hr is 'dead' nowadays, of course... although I _hate_ sudden death games vs computers, unless everyone uses an automatic interface to stop the typing problems...
This page took 0 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.