lichess.org
Donate

Should the Marathon Blitz event ideally be 3 minute chess instead of 5 minute?!

A few players (at least on reddit's /r/chess) refuse to play with increment at all.
I am worried that adding an increment might be a turn off to many players.

Either way, I don't think it will reduce rates of cheating, just be a different time control. Take that from experience.
Maybe we could start with an official hourly increment tournament to see how popular it is before we even consider an increment marathon? I bet there are enough players that prefer increment to support one hourly tournament out of the three to four total (either by adding it or replacing the least popular SuperBlitz Arena with an Increment Arena). I think it requires a different enough of a playstyle (i.e. no playing to flag) that it can coexist with tournaments of similar length that lack an increment.
One downside to 3min games that has not been mentioned yet: the in my opinion really neat berserk option becomes practically unusable as playing with only 1:30 is just way too much of a risk for such a small reward. About cheating: I have played several games against all the other top players and they were all clearly human. So cheating is already being dealt with properly and shouldn't be the main reason to change the time control.

That all being said, I don't mind either time control and 3min games for the next marathon for a bit of variety sounds fine.
Hellball,
There are a lot of players to refuse playing WITHOUT increment, too. Look at IM ChessExplained: if he could he would ALWAYS play blitz WITH some increment.
I really think that the last marathon was a big success, even tho the leading guy for a long time was banned for cheating. It would be a good idea to have lower time controls to avoid cheating. On the other hand the more time we have on the clock the better chess we ll play so it's a difficult decision to make. Since the marathons are still on experimenting stage i think it's better to try different time controls so that we all see which works better. So i 'd like to see a 3+0 tournament next time :)
I think ,cheaters in this kind of event ;the marathon will be detected fairly easier than in normal tournaments, so changing to 3 min will not affect this, also the berserk will become unstable as Voat mentioned , when I played this 5 min marathon and faced a big fellow who activate this option , I kinda enjoy it and felt like he is giving me a sort of handicap ,if he win, he truly deserve this, risking half of his time, and the game becomes somewhat even because my winning chances would be increase,,,3 min will not give players this mutual chance of winning
I think little increment should be there. 4+5 would be good. Time pressure becomes too much for lower rated players & they start blundering right and left in superior position after 2 mins game play in absence of any increment 'cause they are left with less time to deliver mate, by preventing blunders, promoting pawns, creating mating nets. I feel end game requires more accurate moves than openings & middle games. So increment is a nice idea.
Anyway I enjoyed the marathon a lot. Keep up the good work Lichess.
I think things should stay the same. I agree with most of the comments against changing it. As for #29's comment bout lower rated players blundering in time trouble - that is, without sounding too mean, their problem. It should encourage them to want to get better in endgame phase and in time scramble positions. I don't think making it easier is the way to go. A big part of chess is time management, the only way to improve is to be in those positions and learn from them for future. That is all.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.