11-09-2012, 12:55 PM
First of all, perhaps this increment discussion could be moved to another independent thread so as not to disrupt the main Olympiad topic. Andy?
I wish to give an example of what can happen with the 30 second increment...
At the U16 Olympiad a top Russian and Iranian guy were fighting out a very tricky finish where both had chances. The game lasted approx 40 minutes after all others were finished. I watched this game and marvelled at how they seemed able to churn out good moves seemingly continuously until I believe the game was eventually agreed drawn. I am a 1700 player and would have floundered hopelessly in this level of battle. This now leads to the question...Are stronger players much more comfortable with this increment method than weaker players? The answer I feel must surely be yes. I would like a tournament organiser to take a bold step and introduce a 30 second increment in the lowest section to see what effect it had. I strongly suspect it wouldn't affect the total playing time too much and could certainly lead to many exciting finishes.
Robin.
I wish to give an example of what can happen with the 30 second increment...
At the U16 Olympiad a top Russian and Iranian guy were fighting out a very tricky finish where both had chances. The game lasted approx 40 minutes after all others were finished. I watched this game and marvelled at how they seemed able to churn out good moves seemingly continuously until I believe the game was eventually agreed drawn. I am a 1700 player and would have floundered hopelessly in this level of battle. This now leads to the question...Are stronger players much more comfortable with this increment method than weaker players? The answer I feel must surely be yes. I would like a tournament organiser to take a bold step and introduce a 30 second increment in the lowest section to see what effect it had. I strongly suspect it wouldn't affect the total playing time too much and could certainly lead to many exciting finishes.
Robin.