It is currently Mon May 20, 2013 9:09 pm

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

 Page 1 of 6 [ 104 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: EGF and Fischer #1 Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:59 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
Since there is no mentioning in EGF rating page Fischer time, I would like to make examples and suggestions for minimum Fischer settings for different classes.

EGF C-class: 20 10f
EGF B-class: 30 15f
EGF A-class: 40 20f

We should also have AA-class for EGC:

EGF AA-class: 80 40f

Where Fischer adjusted times are 40min, 60min, 80min and 160min respectively. So they will meet minimum EGF requirements by a margin. I have calculated Fischer adjusted time where it is assumed that 2×120 moves are played during the game.

Other, more complicated way to calculate the conversion for EGF tournament classes is, that first the "basic time" is calculated where it is assumed that players do play 60 moves before entering to "overtime". Thus in the case of A-class tournament Fischer time would converge as 40min + 60 stones × 20 sec Fischer increment = 60 minutes. That will meet the minimum criteria for basic time in A class tournament. After that we can assume that Fischer is like Canadian overtime and 20 sec Fischer will be the same as 15 stones in 5 minutes Canadian. That means additional 20 minutes and we will get 80 minutes for adjusted time. 75 min adjusted is minimum for EGF A class tournament

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #2 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:57 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 702
Liked others: 165
Was liked: 104
Rank: German 2 dan
I would propose to calculate adjusted time for Bonus timing as the time for 150 moves, which seems to match the japanese and canadian standards quite well. Class A would be met by Bonus time 38/15, class B by 25/10, and class C by 15/6.

I do not think that it would be useful to increase the requirements. I also do not see a need for an AA class.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #3 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 am
 Dies in gote

Posts: 47
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 11
GD Posts: 140
Thanks for making the translation, it looks ok to me.
I agree with you that Fischer time is a good time system, I believe it may be possible to argue that it is objectively better than any of the overtime systems normally used for go.

* Availability of clocks is and will remain a decisive factor.
* Byo-yomi with several byo-yomi periods is not too bad either.

* The clocks still need to give some warning that time is running out.
* The fact that time may get short regardless of time system is not the point,
it's undesirable that games end in a silly way and they do more easily with
some time systems than with others.
* Much longer times are used in chess than in go, although chess players have
fewer moves to make. It's fun to play fast games too, but I think it's good
that there are go tournaments with more generous time limits as well. The EGC
is perhaps the best we have in that respect.

regards,
Henric

 This post by henric was liked by: Liisa
Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #4 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:05 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
henric wrote:
I agree with you that Fischer time is a good time system, I believe it may be possible to argue that it is objectively better than any of the overtime systems normally used for go.

I would add that Fischer is not just objectively better, but it is also significantly better! And I am sure that most people will agree when they are used to it. Fischer requires some active time management to get most out of it. But requirements for the active time management is in any case far less demanding than with traditional overtime timings.

I think that the most significant difference is that it is not perhaps wise and not even necessary let time run close to zero, but it is good idea to keep decent buffer, e.g. 10 minutes or so, so that if things get difficult there is enough time for reading.

Quote:
* Availability of clocks is and will remain a decisive factor.

Clocks (e.g. Excalibur2) cost just around \$30 so it is not big deal to gather enough clocks to the clubs. In Finland we already have Excaliburs more than enough to meet the demands of any local tournament. Also it is not wrong to have Fischer in first boards and Canadian overtime for the rest where only analog clocks are left. McMahon tournaments are unequal anyway by ordering players by rank. And having digital clocks is anyway advantageous for analog clocks even if with both clocks Canadian timing is used.

Quote:
* Byo-yomi with several byo-yomi periods is not too bad either.

Byouyomi with several periods is not that bad for the players. But because some people are chouchikuns, who think that in 2×8 hour game it is wise to enter byouyomi when there is played just 64 moves out of 300. Therefore it is bad for schedule. And those who would like to finish their games during main time had to wait unnecessarily. So if staying in schedule is preferred, severe overtime is required e.g. 1-3×20sec or 20-25/5min Canadian. And that is bad for the players.

Quote:
The clocks still need to give some warning that time is running out.

With Excalibur it is enough that it beeps 30-60 seconds before time runs out.

We really do not need any more audible features that just a single beep! (referring here to some other approaches taken by other game timer models. =)

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #5 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:27 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
Harleqin wrote:
I would propose to calculate adjusted time for Bonus timing as the time for 150 moves, which seems to match the japanese and canadian standards quite well. Class A would be met by Bonus time 38/15, class B by 25/10, and class C by 15/6.

I do not think that it would be useful to increase the requirements.

Problem is with your calculations that in order to meet with EGF A-class requirements there must be at least 60 minutes time available to be used for the first 60 moves (60 moves is reasonable compromise). This criteria is not met by your calculations. Also when making calculations there must be enough time available even for 230 move game. That means that there must be at least 2×75 minutes time to play 230 move game.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #6 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:40 am
 Gosei

Posts: 1211
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 92
Was liked: 574
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
I think 60 moves is too little, 90 is more reasonable.

Currently, A class requires at least one of:
• 75 minutes sudden death
• 60 minutes + 60 moves in 15m Canadian byoyomi
• 60 minutes + 45 moves @ 20s Japanese byoyomi

That would indicate that the rating list considers 45 moves in Japanese byoyomi, or 60 moves in Canadian byoyomi, sufficient to finish the game (since 75 min sudden death is considered equivalent).

Given a reasonable upper bound of ~150 moves per player, that would mean that the EGF considers 90-105 moves in main time reasonable, so I think main time calculations should be based on ~90 moves, not 60.

At 15 seconds Fischer bonus, as proposed by Harleqin, that would add 22.5 minutes to the main time, so 37.5 minutes starting time would suffice.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #7 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:49 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 488
Location: Beijing, China
Liked others: 84
Was liked: 64
Just want to say, I love that we are having this discussion and so many bright minds and strong players are actively pushing Fischer timing.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #8 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:05 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
HermanHiddema wrote:
I think main time calculations should be based on ~90 moves, not 60.

Perhaps your argument is good. But I would still think that proper value is greater than 60 but less than 90. I rounded my figures upwards so that they will surely fit to EGF requirements. So there should be some room to go shorter Fischer times and still give decent games.

But 12 second increment is the same as 25 stones in 5 minutes Canadian. Therefore playing long over 350 move game with 6 seconds increment is just ridiculous and does not meet the spirit of EGF tournament classes. Thus I would set minimum possible increment to 10 seconds or 12 seconds.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #9 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:04 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 702
Liked others: 165
Was liked: 104
Rank: German 2 dan
Liisa wrote:
Thus I would set minimum possible increment to 10 seconds or 12 seconds.

The problem is that the EGF still also allows absolute time to be used. As long as that is the case, setting a minimum ratio of bonus to basic time opens an illogical gap: a tournament director could choose, for example, 75 min absolute or Bonus 50/10 to get class A, but 60/6 would not be possible, although it would surely be preferable to 75 min absolute.

You could, of course, also try to get rid of absolute time (I would support that), but I think that this would meet too big political resistance, regrettably. In any case, I would not put these two things into one proposal to the AGM.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #10 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:32 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
Harleqin wrote:
Liisa wrote:
Thus I would set minimum possible increment to 10 seconds or 12 seconds.

The problem is that the EGF still also allows absolute time to be used.

But it is not actively used! It is there just for reference. But if we set up minimum Fischer people may really try it in practice, although it requires lots of practicing and active time management skill from the players. People are not that particularly good in that. Even 20 10f may be difficult to control for unexperienced players.

But I understand your point and EGF tournament setting certainly are not logical. E.g. EGF considers 60 mins + 1×20 sec to fit to class A, but does not allow 60 min + 25/5min Canadian to fit class A. This just does not make any sense, because probability for time loss is huge in the former (for me probability of timeloss with 1×20sec byouyomi is more than 20% and with close game, probably more than 50%. 25/5min Canadian is still manageable, but 1×20sec is far too difficult for me.)

Perhaps we should rationalize the tournament classes, because they are not well defined. E.g. how many byouyomiperiods are available should be taken in consideration.

I would also set completely new tournament classes where:

class C: 20 10f
class B: 40 20f
class A: 60 30f

and the weights for Gor calculations should be 0.5×, 1.0× and 1.5× respectively.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #11 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:57 am
 Gosei

Posts: 1211
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 92
Was liked: 574
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
Liisa wrote:
Harleqin wrote:
Liisa wrote:
Thus I would set minimum possible increment to 10 seconds or 12 seconds.

The problem is that the EGF still also allows absolute time to be used.

But it is not actively used! It is there just for reference.

Actually, it is actively used. In the Netherlands we have the Eindhoven tournament with 75 minutes sudden death (class A), and the Arnhem tournament with 60 minutes sudden death (class B), both of which are large (40-60 participants) serious tournaments.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #12 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 9:13 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 702
Liked others: 165
Was liked: 104
Rank: German 2 dan
Quote:
I would also set completely new tournament classes where:

class C: 20 10f
class B: 40 20f
class A: 60 30f

and the weights for GoR calculations should be 0.5×, 1.0× and 1.5×, respectively.

60/30 has a T300 (time for 300 moves) of 4:30 h, 40/20 3:00 h, and 20/10 1:30 h. Your class B would require significantly more time per game than the current class A.

I think that the current classification sees class A as standard: "this is enough to be included in our rating system". The lower classes (B and C) are "OK too, but we weigh them less".

Your proposed increase of requirements and addition of "more than standard" is a big paradigm shift: I find it questionable whether "even more time" warrants to weigh these games even more.

I believe that it is better to go step by step. First, introduce Bonus timing to the EGF standards, with no other strings attached. Calculating the adjusted time (TA) as the overall time for 150 moves seems like a sensible proposal.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #13 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:37 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 692
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 78
Rank: EGF 6k
GD Posts: 600
KGS: mid-SDK
Universal go server handle: karaklis
Liisa wrote:
Harleqin wrote:
The problem is that the EGF still also allows absolute time to be used.

But it is not actively used! It is there just for reference.

The Leuven/Louvain/Löwen-Tournament (Belgium) uses 75 min absolute time without byoyomi.

_________________
SL | EGF | KGS | GMT+1

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #14 Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:02 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
My assumption was clearly wrong. In that other thread there was not much fans for absolute time without increments and it was considered absolutely worse than overtime or time bonus. I think now as aided by real examples that the difference is far less clear.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #15 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:04 am
 Gosei

Posts: 1211
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 92
Was liked: 574
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
Liisa wrote:
My assumption was clearly wrong. In that other thread there was not much fans for absolute time without increments and it was considered absolutely worse than overtime or time bonus. I think now as aided by real examples that the difference is far less clear.

Ceratinly for tournament organizers, absolute time is an attractive option, because it is the easiest to schedule for. Whether that reflects any real popularity among the players, I don't know.

Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #16 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:02 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
Quote:
EGF C-class: 20 10f
EGF B-class: 30 15f
EGF A-class: 40 20f

C: 10 10f
B: 25 12f
A: 30 20f

After reconsidering, these would be my suggestions for preferred minimum Fischer times. Fischer adjusted times for T270 are 2×32½min, 2×52min and 2×75min.

Of course time controls like 30 2 bronstein are perfectly acceptable. These settings were tried in one rapid tournament in Finland 2008 and in my opinion this should be good time control. But if we use increments that are smaller than 12, we should be very cautious with calculating adjusted times. And Txxx value should be greatly reduced from T270.

Last edited by Liisa on Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #17 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:32 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 293
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 13
Rank: hopeless
HermanHiddema wrote:
Ceratinly for tournament organizers, absolute time is an attractive option, because it is the easiest to schedule for. Whether that reflects any real popularity among the players, I don't know.

Absolute time may be attractive for organizers, but in my opinion it is a horrible way to play Go. I would never, ever enter a tournament with such a time control.

_________________
Main Entry: zing·er Pronunciation: \ˈziŋ-ər\
1 : something causing or meant to cause interest, surprise, or shock
2 : a pointed witty remark or retort

 This post by zinger was liked by: Harleqin
Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #18 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:49 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
zinger wrote:
HermanHiddema wrote:
Ceratinly for tournament organizers, absolute time is an attractive option, because it is the easiest to schedule for. Whether that reflects any real popularity among the players, I don't know.

Absolute time may be attractive for organizers, but in my opinion it is a horrible way to play Go. I would never, ever enter a tournament with such a time control.

In my opinion 75 minute absolute is far more easy to manage and control than 60min + 1×20sec Japanese byouyomi. I would never participate 60min + 1x20sec tournament. One time in EGC 2010 weekend was perfectly enough. Result was that I lost about 25 gors due to timeloss.

Last edited by Liisa on Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #19 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:02 am
 Tengen

Posts: 4161
Location: Chatteris, UK
Liked others: 1431
Was liked: 573
Rank: 1d
GD Posts: 918
KGS: topazg
Liisa wrote:
In my opinion 75 minute absolute is far more easy to manage and control than 60min + 1×20sec Japanese byouyomi. I would never participate 60min + 1x20sec tournament. One time in EGC 2010 weekend was perfectly enough. Result was that I lost about 25 gors due to timeloss.

I disagree. Losing on time in this case is just poor time management, and not a fault of the time control. In absolute time, if you get low, your opponent can start playing complete nonsense until your clock falls. With 1 x 0:20, you can at least respond to every nonsense move without risk.

_________________
My Go videos | My Go Teaching Ladder (GTL) reviews
I also offer Go teaching lessons
-- Creator of OGS --
"I played a trick play and my opponent fell for it, unfortunately he didn't know the correct followup, so I died"

 This post by topazg was liked by: Harleqin
Top

 Post subject: Re: EGF and Fischer #20 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:08 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 129
Location: Turku, Finland
Liked others: 12
Was liked: 21
Rank: EGF 1989 KGS 2d
topazg wrote:
Liisa wrote:
In my opinion 75 minute absolute is far more easy to manage and control than 60min + 1×20sec Japanese byouyomi. I would never participate 60min + 1x20sec tournament. One time in EGC 2010 weekend was perfectly enough. Result was that I lost about 25 gors due to timeloss.

I disagree. Losing on time in this case is just poor time management, and not a fault of the time control. In absolute time, if you get low, your opponent can start playing complete nonsense until your clock falls. With 1 x 0:20, you can at least respond to every nonsense move without risk.

With 1×20 sec byouyomi, on average 10 seconds is spilled per move. Therefore you have same amount of time allocated for the game as in 75 min absolute, if you play 90 moves in byouyomi. This is of course ridiculous. And those who organized the EGC 2010 tournament did not show much of common sense but just exploited the illogicalities of EGF tournament classes. Weekend tournament should have been sent in class B.

But of course there are requirements that people behave ethically. And from statistical standpoint I think that at higher level, less than 1 out of 20 games will be decided this way. But this is also because you did not leave big enough buffer (e.g. 5 min) so we can count your hypothetical loss due to time pressure. And it is ok. It just shows your poor time management skill. With absolute time, you have always room for active time management. With byouyomi, you are forced to play more than 50 moves in byouyomi where you do not have any options for time management (expect playing a forcing move to gain extra period).

With Fischer time bonus to absolute time we can reduce the time management skill requirements, because total amount of time allocated for the game is in constant ratio to the number of moves played.

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 6 [ 104 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Life In 19x19.com General Topics    Introductions and Guidelines    Off Topic    Announcements    General Go Chat    Beginners    Amateurs    Professionals    Go Rules    Forum/Site Suggestions and Bugs    Creative writing    Tournaments Improve Your Game    Game Analysis    Study Group    Teachers/Club Leaders    Study Journals L19²GO (Malkovich)    1-on-1 Malkovich games    Big Brother Malkovich games    Rengo Games    Other versions of turn-based games Go Gear    Go Books    Go Book Reviews    Computer Go    Gobans and other equipment    Trading Post    New Products/Upgrades/Sales Go Club Forums    Go Club Discussions       Honinbo Go League    American Go Association Forum       Go Congress 2011 volunteers       AGA volunteers ( non-congress)    Australian Go Association    European Go Federation Forum    Singapore Weiqi Association    IGS    ASR League    Insei League Events    KGS    Turn Based Servers    Tygem    WBaduk    Kaya.gs    Ride share to tournaments A&D study group