Life In 19x19

Pyoveli wrote:The only reason (and really, the only reason) EGC2010 used any Ing clocks was financial. If somehow a very big stock of some better digital clock was donated to EGCC, I'm sure lots of future congress organizers would be happy.

I do not think that it necessary to wait very big stock of proper clocks to be donated. It is better than nothing that we have around 24 proper clocks for top boards and for the rest inexpensive Ing clocks are possible choice for filling the lack of proper clocks. Gradually when stock accumulates, the less need there is for Ing clocks.

It was extremely good that EGC 2010 organization could bring proper clocks for side events. Sadly because top boards were in Pyynikki building, it was not practical to give Excaliburs for the top 50 boards, but for boards 100-150. But I would courage other EGC organizers to learn from the good example that Finnish organizers gave, that if EGF clock stockpile is rotten, host organization may do something independently with resources available. E.g. I would think that local Chess clubs could rent their digital game timers for using in Congress. I would not think that is not much more expensive than to cargo Ing clocks all over the Europe.

Also I would think that it is ok to have top boards to use of Fischer time and if only analog clocks are available, Canadian overtime may be used for the rest. Japanse byouyomi may be used with Ing clocks if there is no better choice available, if Ing clock does not handle either Fischer or Canadian overtime. Does Ing clock handle Fischer? If it does, this would solve the clock problem, without further discussion.

At the EGC 2009 in Groningen, we used DGT 2000+ clocks for the top 16 boards specifically because of the dubious reputation of Ing clocks.

I think that for boards using Ing clocks, referees should cut the players some slack with regards to clock issues.

Since Fischer time is OT, I do not state my opinion about it in this thread.

Pyoveli wrote:The only reason (and really, the only reason) EGC2010 used any Ing clocks was financial. If somehow a very big stock of some better digital clock was donated to EGCC, I'm sure lots of future congress organizers would be happy.

I know this is a bit off-topic, but I still find it bizarre that the tournament organizers are expected to provide clocks. This is the EGC, perhaps the premier Go event in the world outside asia, and players are still showing up in large numbers without equipment?

On topic .. if a dozen or more moves were already played in byo-yomi, it becomes difficult to believe that Rob was not aware he was in byo-yomi. My sympathy for his position is reduced under this circumstance.

RobertJasiek wrote:Pyoveli, there is an alternative: Players attending the congress might be required to bring their own clock. This would then require great respect of all towards the clocks and reimbursement for stolen clocks.

This is one of the stupidest suggestions so far, congratulations.

RobertJasiek wrote:Some of the EGC 2010 organizers told me that Finland could have organized other clocks in principle; so I don't buy the "only financial" argument.

We needed 220-250 clocks. We got 50 Excaliburs from the Finnish go clubs. Do the math.

One more thing: I don't like the constant emphasis that "at least the top boards should have better clocks". Are the top players somehow less capable of handling the go timers than the rest of the pack?

Cheers,
Vesa

Hello Vesa,

Vesa wrote:We needed 220-250 clocks. We got 50 Excaliburs from the Finnish go clubs. Do the math.

One more thing: I don't like the constant emphasis that "at least the top boards should have better clocks". Are the top players somehow less capable of handling the go timers than the rest of the pack?

Good point. I had also been thinking about it.
Perhaps it would be a better rule to have simpler/safer
clocks for pairings where at least one of the players is
old (above 45 or so) because old people typically have more
problems with techno tricks.

Ingo (49 years)

Vesa wrote:I don't like the constant emphasis that "at least the top boards should have better clocks". Are the top players somehow less capable of handling the go timers than the rest of the pack?

This suggestion is perhaps the second stupidest suggestion so far. And yes they do, because in order to be top player you need to use every second for thinking that is given for you. You should know that. And there is little money issue that only top players do fight for money. And also there is the issue with Eurogopro, where it presumably matters to perform well in major tournaments such as EGC.

McMahon inherently emphasizes only top group players, so no moral problems there.

zinger wrote:

Pyoveli wrote:The only reason (and really, the only reason) EGC2010 used any Ing clocks was financial. If somehow a very big stock of some better digital clock was donated to EGCC, I'm sure lots of future congress organizers would be happy.

I know this is a bit off-topic, but I still find it bizarre that the tournament organizers are expected to provide clocks. This is the EGC, perhaps the premier Go event in the world outside asia, and players are still showing up in large numbers without equipment?

It is necessary for the organizers to arrange the material, otherwise there is no way to guarantee that there is enough. Bringing a board and stones is troublesome and heavy for anyone not coming by car, while clocks are not widely owned by players personally.

Asking people to bring equipment and then hoping there is enough is no way to run a professional event.

Additionally, if four hundred players bring a clock, it is absolute hell to keep track of whose clock is where, in what condition it was (in case of claims of damage), etc.

In Groningen, in addition to the material provided by the EGCC, we loaned material from at least five other clubs, and already it was quite a challenge to keep track of all the material, and we had to replace some stuff that was "lost".

On topic .. if a dozen or more moves were already played in byo-yomi, it becomes difficult to believe that Rob was not aware he was in byo-yomi. My sympathy for his position is reduced under this circumstance.

Rob says he was not aware he was in byoyomi, and I see no reason to doubt his word on it. With 60 seconds byoyomi, it is very well possible to play a few moves in byoyomi without noticing, especially when the clock is silent now, while in all previous he had experienced that it would talk about the byoyomi at length (When on, the Ing clock announces entering every period, then talks every ten seconds, and every second of the last ten seconds).

Vesa, I prefer players bringing their own clocks to any Ing clock ever having to be used. Ing clocks are stupid - not my proposal to not use them. The maths is easy: One needs some half the number of clocks as participants. For reimbursement, the congress organization needs insurance - at the same time, it saves transport costs.

Those (like the Appeals Committee) thinking that top players were in need of better clocks think so because top players considered winning of greater importance and as a side effect caused more referee involed disputes. I do not know if that is so or not.

I do think though that top players deserve better playing material, if available; they sit longer at the board, they think harder and their thinking can be yet better when the playing material is better. Also top players have, by virtue of their greater playing skill, earned the right to better playing material.

HermanHiddema wrote:It is necessary for the organizers to arrange the material, otherwise there is no way to guarantee that there is enough. Bringing a board and stones is troublesome and heavy for anyone not coming by car, while clocks are not widely owned by players personally.

Asking people to bring equipment and then hoping there is enough is no way to run a professional event.

Additionally, if four hundred players bring a clock, it is absolute hell to keep track of whose clock is where, in what condition it was (in case of claims of damage), etc.

In Groningen, in addition to the material provided by the EGCC, we loaned material from at least five other clubs, and already it was quite a challenge to keep track of all the material, and we had to replace some stuff that was "lost".

I guess Go just operates under different standards than chess, despite their apparent similarities. When I was playing tournament chess, the organizers never provided equipment in bulk. In larger events they might have a few spares around. But these were rarely used because everyone brought their own, and nobody thought of it as a burden, it was just normal. In fact, in the rare instances when it somehow came to pass that both players in a game lacked a set, board, or clock, and had to borrow from other players or organizers, it was considered very silly of them, and entirely their own fault.

As a result of this "training", I would absolutely never show up to a Go tournament without set and clock (Excalibur for me). To me it sounds like going to a tennis tournament without a raquet, expecting the TD to give me one. Apparently I am the strange one.

zinger wrote: To me it sounds like going to a tennis tournament without a raquet, expecting the TD to give me one. Apparently I am the strange one.

A raquet is a personalized piece of equipment, adjusted to the size of your hand.

So do you also bring your own court and net?

HermanHiddema wrote:

zinger wrote: To me it sounds like going to a tennis tournament without a raquet, expecting the TD to give me one. Apparently I am the strange one.

A raquet is a personalized piece of equipment, adjusted to the size of your hand.

So do you also bring your own court and net?

Hehe, fun conversation - isn't that more the same as bringing your own chair and table?

topazg wrote:

HermanHiddema wrote:

zinger wrote: To me it sounds like going to a tennis tournament without a raquet, expecting the TD to give me one. Apparently I am the strange one.

A raquet is a personalized piece of equipment, adjusted to the size of your hand.

So do you also bring your own court and net?

Hehe, fun conversation - isn't that more the same as bringing your own chair and table?

Well, neither chair nor table are really required to play go, as you can play with a floor board. But you can't play tennis without court and net

HermanHiddema wrote:

topazg wrote:
Hehe, fun conversation - isn't that more the same as bringing your own chair and table?

Well, neither chair nor table are really required to play go, as you can play with a floor board. But you can't play tennis without court and net

I was about to retort that you still need a floor, which is like a court.

But Go can even be played without a floor if you have a magnetic board and are in space.

Monadology wrote:

HermanHiddema wrote:

topazg wrote:
Hehe, fun conversation - isn't that more the same as bringing your own chair and table?

Well, neither chair nor table are really required to play go, as you can play with a floor board. But you can't play tennis without court and net

I was about to retort that you still need a floor, which is like a court.

But Go can even be played without a floor if you have a magnetic board and are in space.

Still, I think it is a valid point. Perhaps for tennis people should instead bring some chalk or paint, which they can use to apply lines to an organizer provided floor?