Increment vs. No Increment

The chess clock has nothing to do with your skill or with what you’re capable of creating on the chessboard.

Think of a surgeon operating on the brain. Of course, there are time constraints, and someone may be monitoring the clock. But the clock doesn’t determine the surgeon’s skill, the quality of their judgment, or the complexity of the operation. It simply imposes a practical limit.

Chess is the same. The clock is a constraint. It is not a measurement of the depth of your thought, the quality of your ideas, or the beauty of the moves you’re capable of finding.

The question is: should a player lose because their clock reaches zero while they are still capable of producing brilliant chess?

Long live increment, and any time-control system that reduces the role of sudden-death time pressure and gives the game more room for thought.

I suppose I could go ahead and enter a 10+0 arena tournament, or just create some 10+0 games and see if my rating immediately starts to fall. I suspect it would, because my opponents at 10+5 are almost always way up on the clock at the end of game, so the 10+0 is going to affect my play way more than most of my opponents.

@IamNOTamod said ^

6 or 7

You couldn't resist, could you?

I think it's an interesting and valid point. Sometimes the time discrepancy is even greater. So I am taking advantage of the extra time and many of my opponents are not. They just blitz out moves. I think that is just how they are used to playing. The increment gives us both the ability to slow down and calculate. I am taking advantage of it while others are not. I think I have gotten better, but not 250 rating points better, because these faster players seem to be putting themselves at a huge disadvantage by playing super fast out of habit.

"enter a 10+0 arena tournament"

• Berserk often degenerates that to 5+0 blitz.

@BGW5422 said ^

Do you think a 1500 player that plays 10+5

When I tried +5 seconds (5 years ago) I stopped playing +0. This guarantees that I will win in a winning position.

@BGW5422 said ^

I started playing about 4 1/2 years ago and hung between 1200 and 1350 for a couple years. I did win or place in a few arena tournaments, but that was more luck of the draw than it was improvement. I lost a lot of games by getting flagged with winning positions. So, I started playing 10+5 increment and pretty much have been climbing ever since. I bounce around 1550 now.
What I don't know is, am ...

I think you are much better! it seems that the problem was your time management, which is fixed in increment. I often find non increment games to be a guilty pleasure of sorts, having 1 minute left in a classical/rapid game gives you lots of adrenaline, however if you want to get better I think increment is much better, as with no flagging involved, the game quality is better.

Also at least in my experience I would say better players play increment, up until around 22-2300. Increment players are people who have been completely winning in 10+0 and then lost too many times that they switch, so I find them to be much better

@tpr said in #3:

No increment creates an alternative win condition: flagging.
That detracts from the pure win condition to checkmate.

@TitusPlaysChess123 said in #9:

... So you’re saying 30+0 and 60+0 would definitely create flagging?

@tpr said in #10:

... Yes, even 120+0.
Even if it does not lead to flagging, it may cause blunders for fear of flagging.

In order to have 30 minutes in a 15+10 game, it would have to last for 90 moves. To have 60 minutes, a 15+10 game would have to last for 270 moves. To have 120 minutes, a 630-move game would be required.

It is the other way around.
Regardless if you play 30+0, 60+0, or 120+0 against an equal player,
you are likely to use that time and end up in time trouble, where flagging or fear of flagging decides the game.
15+10 forces you to play faster and save 10 seconds per move to finish your game.
If 15+10 is too fast for you, then 30+20, 30+30, 45+45, 90+30 are available for you.

@tpr said in #18:

It is the other way around.
Regardless if you play 30+0, 60+0, or 120+0 against an equal player,
you are likely to use that time and end up in time trouble, where flagging or fear of flagging decides the game.
15+10 forces you to ...

If a 15+10 game lasts less that 90 moves, one will have less than 30 minutes for all of one's moves.
If a 15+10 game lasts less that 270 moves, one will have less than 60 minutes for all of one's moves.
If a 15+10 game lasts less that 630 moves, one will have less than 120 minutes for all of one's moves.
"... It is a mathematical certainty. ..." - Thomas Andrews character in Titanic movie
https[colon]//www[period]youtube[period]com/watch?v=JEDZHK3cxdw

It is the other way around. If you have time then you tend to use it.