There was idiotic time limits in European Team Champioship Games in
Plodivik, Bulgaria at 10.-21. of October, 2003. Times were just 90
min/per 40 moves +30 sec./move as constrasted to normal 90 min/40
moves and 1h/each for rest of the game.
Time limits were poor because you get just 30 sec. after 40 moves,
when you very propably need the time most. Result: Terrible amount of
blunders and generally poor playing after 40 moves. This time we can
not blame Fide for this blunder but those who arranged the games.
This story is based on article on Finnish Chess Magazine 12/2003 by
Mika Karttunen, member of finnish team.

Riku

I totally agree with Riku. Seems to me that this whole idea of short time
limits do nothing as far as encouraging "good chess", rather, imho, they are
more a product of those who seem to have an attention deficit
disorder...or..as so commonly heard: "I'm bored". Well, guess what...if
someone is that bored with the game maybe they should find some other
activity.

"Riku Simonen" wrote in message
om...
There was idiotic time limits in European Team Champioship Games in
Plodivik, Bulgaria at 10.-21. of October, 2003. Times were just 90
min/per 40 moves +30 sec./move as constrasted to normal 90 min/40
moves and 1h/each for rest of the game.
Time limits were poor because you get just 30 sec. after 40 moves,
when you very propably need the time most. Result: Terrible amount of
blunders and generally poor playing after 40 moves. This time we can
not blame Fide for this blunder but those who arranged the games.
This story is based on article on Finnish Chess Magazine 12/2003 by
Mika Karttunen, member of finnish team.

Riku

I don't get what the complaint is - G/90+30 has been around for quite some time
- World Championships, Olympiads, etc. The article's a few years late.

John Fernandez

Just because the G/90+30 has been around for some time doesn't mean that
everyone likes it.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is that this trend to shorter time
limits overall is not something I myself want to see continue...Yeah..I
know..I might be just one voice sort of out in the wilderness by myself..but
I don't think so. In short, I see more sense and benefit to chess overall
with Dan Heisman's view re what he calls "real chess" as opposed to all
these blitz, bullet, and whatever else some people have come up with.

Do I think Blitz is bad..no, it isn't...but it is not something I would
consider on the same plane as a chess game with 40/2+20/1+1. As for these
ideas of reinventing the game..so to speak..such as random chess and the
like...I am not even going to give those things the dignity of a statement.
"John Fernandez" wrote in message
...
I don't get what the complaint is - G/90+30 has been around for quite some
time
- World Championships, Olympiads, etc. The article's a few years late.

John Fernandez