steve uurtamo wrote:
> true, and a good point. time management other than attempting
> to equally divide remaining time among the expected number of
> remaining moves (which itself isn't so easy to estimate) is
> complicated.
But that is so much better than human time management!
If the expect
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 04:18:20PM -0700, steve uurtamo wrote:
> true, and a good point. time management other than attempting
> to equally divide remaining time among the expected number of
> remaining moves (which itself isn't so easy to estimate) is
> complicated.
Even that has the complicatio
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 11:55:47AM +0100, Jacques Basaldúa wrote:
> Computers feel comfortable with any time settings, and no matter how
> naif the scheduling algorithm is, it will always be far better than
> human scheduling. Computers can safely approach using 99.999% of their
> time (asymptotica
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 17:54 -0700, steve uurtamo wrote:
> actually, it's least complicated with sudden death.
I don't agree. We are talking about time management from the humans
point of view and the human player doesn't need to think as hard about
playing quickly in order to save time for later.
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 18:16 -0700, steve uurtamo wrote:
> sorry, i should have said that i think that it's least complicated
> with sudden death. unless you mean to treat it internally as
> if it's sudden death, but to use fisher time to make up for lag/delay.
I'm talking about from the humans po
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 07:56 +0200, nando wrote:
> Not sure this was mentioned before, but there's an interesting study
> work presented at
> http://senseis.xmp.net/?TimingSystemsRedux
I just looked, after a quick scan it looks pretty good. It seems
logical and there is no undo deference to trad
There is some server issue with CGOS and it has been going down
unexpectedly from time to time.
We suspect it's not due to the CGOS software but some kind of recent
upgrade to the system.
If CGOS goes down today, it may be down for a while since I will be out
most of the time today.
Just a
3-5 or 5-10 seconds is not a "relaxed" or "comfortable" pace for most human
players. Byo yomi
is usually set at 30 seconds per move. Canadian time controls might be "20
moves in five minutes",
which is 300/20=15 seconds per -- players seem to find that they often are
pushed to play the last
fiv
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 06:44 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote:
> 3-5 or 5-10 seconds is not a "relaxed" or "comfortable" pace for most
> human players. Byo yomi
> is usually set at 30 seconds per move. Canadian time controls might be
> "20 moves in five minutes", .
Who said the pace is 5-10 second
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 11:12 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> All of these considerations together would seem to indicate that it is
> best to let the human have as much control as possible by allocating a
> large pool of initial time and keeping the increment pretty small
> (just
> what is needed to comf
> The right parameters for Fischer time is whatever allows the highest
> quality of games in the shortest actual game time and of course these
> values can only be estimated or guessed at.I have estimated (perhaps
> incorrectly but based on many comments from the group and for other
> reasons t
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 08:52 -0700, steve uurtamo wrote:
> > The right parameters for Fischer time is whatever allows the highest
> > quality of games in the shortest actual game time and of course these
> > values can only be estimated or guessed at.I have estimated (perhaps
> > incorrectly but
12 matches
Mail list logo
