ErictheRed wrote on 03/12/13 at 18:49:47:


You have to be wary of players who rattle out their moves at about a minute a move, trying to keep up can be a mistake. They do give themselves away on occasion by slowing down when they lose confidence in their position.

Also, I now understand how I came up with my arbitrary '15 mins by move 35' heuristic. Many years ago, I regularly used to play 35/90 +15, so was used to having 15 minutes after move 35...so when confronted by this weird g/120 control, I just ran with what I was used to...funny how one latches on to such anchor points without really thinking about them.

One more thing: learn to think on your opponent's time!  If the game is relatively short, don't allow yourself a break while your opponent's clock is ticking, as you might in a longer game.  Know your own limitations, but spend as much energy as you can during your opponent's turn so that you are ready with replies to his more obvious moves quickly.

ErictheRed wrote on 03/11/13 at 21:27:48:


The other tip is to make non-forced moves quickly. If you are in a position where detailed tactics are some moves away and you know where the pieces are supposed to go, there's little point in a game with relatively limited time in expanding much effort on an exact move order.

I have never even heard of G/120 before, so I cannot speak from experience. However, 90 for 40 moves and 30 for the rest is quite common in Norwegian weekend tournaments, which of course adds up to G/120 if the game lasts longer than 40 moves. I think I would have tried to manage the time similarly to that time control, so that I would try to have at least 30 minutes left after 40 moves. I tend to play quite a large amount of long games, so from my experience, 30 minutes after 40 moves is often not that much.

I doubt I would feel G/120 would be similar to G/90 + 30 seconds increment. From experience with the latter time control, it helps a lot to know that I won't have to save time for an "easy" endgame. In most games, the total time spent will be quite similar, but the uncertainty about the length of the game would make me much more reluctant to use a "depends on the position" approach in G/120.

I can think of an extreme example where the difference is clearly seen: I once played a wild game, under the time control 90/G + 30 seconds increment where in the end, my opponent allowed me to queen my pawn, leaving me a whole queen up (2 against 1!), but he still had a dangerous attack. A couple of moves later, it was clear that he had nothing more than a perpetual check, but if I was going to play for a win, I would have to leave my king even more exposed. I had perhaps 3-4 minutes left, so I calculated until I had 10 seconds left, and decided I could play for a win. My calculations were correct, and since I could escape the attack with a whole queen up, I knew my 30 seconds per move would allow me an easy win. How long would I have dared to think if I had no increment? I honestly don't know. And I am pretty sure that without the increments, I would not have dared to be leave myself with 3-4 minutes left for the game in such a complicated position.

MartinC wrote on 03/11/13 at 13:08:11:


The Chiltern competition is a Saturday afternoon competition in the UK between the counties of Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire and Hampshire. For various reasons it plays some matches at 36/90 + 30 and others at G/120. It's quite noticeable that matches under the G/120 rules take longer to resolve. What many players seem to do is to play to a tempo of forty moves in 110 to 115 minutes  and hope the game is over or clearly won (or lost) by move forty. If you can play a little bit faster than that, say 40 moves in 100 minutes and wrap things up without requiring a long ending, you never encounter the dubious pleasures of a time scramble. It's much the same if playing 90 30, if you play quickly enough, having to rely on the increment won't become an issue.

With digital clocks and not using increment, it's nicer to play to G/120 etc because of the annoying feature of digital clocks not adding the extra time at the move count. I should add that it's the accepted practice in the UK with mechanical clocks that the extra time is added when both players are satisfied the first time control has been reached.

Is this genuinely common? Rare in the UK at least as we nearly always have a time control. Not always a long one of course but ~30 moves in a hour then 15 to finish is typical for evening leagues.

iirc some do operate without a time control which does seem scary. I think you'd have to impose a time control on yourself and try quite hard to stick to it.

Maybe for g/120 1 hour for 40 moves from 20 for the rest?