Team Lightning

[Ken_Stewart]

Winners were Hamilton A 26, 2nd Dundee A 18, 3rd Stepps 17.
Section 2, Wandering Dragons
Section 3, Zebras

Report with cross-table will appear soon on main website.

Regarding increments, I can see advantages for 4min+2sec over 3+2, but the latter is more standard. Of course clocks can be set to either, but 3+2 is a standard supplied setting on the clocks we used whereas 4+2 would require specific programming for each clock and take much longer to set up.

Yesterday produced a wide range of questions about various kinds of illegal move, some quite tricky.

[amuir]

Ken , thanks again for organising.
The 5/0 was enjoyable and our illegal move dispute decision was accepted amicably.
If you have a proposal for different time control please raise at CS AGM as I wish to raise a case for the defence of 5/0.

[JRedpath]

Yes thanks to Ken for organising again.

5 0 works well no need change.

[Alan Tate]

Just use 3+2 then - it's the international standard. 4+2 is also fine but if it's a hassle then no need in my opinion.

If we're going to keep 5+0, can we also go back to analogue clocks and smoking at the board? Thanks.

[Hugh Brechin]

Just use 3+2 then - it's the international standard. 4+2 is also fine but if it's a hassle then no need in my opinion.

If we're going to keep 5+0, can we also go back to analogue clocks and smoking at the board? Thanks.

This.

3+2 would be nice. Clocks can do increments now. That's a good thing. It means it's 'a quick chess game' rather than 'some chess followed by flinging pieces around randomly'.

[Hugh Brechin]

(Thanks, incidentally, to Ken for organising as ever, and congratulations to Hamilton, who were far, far too good for everyone else on the day.)