Quote:


Me for example. I would love to see classical chess replaced by rapid matches (say 2 rounds of 2 games instead of one classical game or even 3 rounds of 2 games). It would be fun to watch, fun to play and easier to organize weekend tournaments (which could be attended by people who cant afford travelling for weeks to play chess anymore).

BPaulsen wrote on 06/23/11 at 23:11:49:


Not sure how much people would enjoy it if all they did was play blitz and rapid as they probably wouldn't improve that much.  Aren't most blitz and rapid players people that play both those and classical time controls.  Who plays only blitz that is a fairly serious player?

pretty cool idea if you ask me.

that would be sweet to have events like that rated.

blitz, rapid, and classical can all co-exist happily.

I seriously hope that he's not dumb enough to believe a blitz/rapid champion should have anything to do with the classical champion. Edit: I don't think the "absolute champion" idea is worth anything either.

If he actually put some thought into this he'd realize champions at the different time controls can exist independently much like you have weight classes in powerlifting/olympic lifting.

By changing a certain factor (time versus body-weight) you can substantially alter the outcomes enough to merit having champions based on that factor, while having no negative repercussions.

It would also do much to popularize chess, because you'd attract the people that aren't patient enough to sit around for slow games, but enjoy the excitement of fast play. Keeping separate ratings based on time controls makes a lot of sense as well.