Feature request: time control as in the real classical tournaments

[Kristinita]

1. Summary

It would be nice, if would be possible to play on Lichess with the same time control as in the official classical chess tournaments.

2. Related issues

#6169

3. Examples of desired behavior

It would be nice, if it would be possible to play on Lichess with the same time control as in the most important chess tournaments:

1. FIDE World Championship Match 2021 — «The time control for each game is 120 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 60 minutes for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 61».
2. FIDE World Cup 2021 — «The time control for each game is: 90 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 1».
3. Tata Steel Chess in Wijk an Zee 2022, Canditates Tournament 2020—2021 and Grand Swiss 2021 — «The time control for each game is: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 50 minutes for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 1».

4. Argumentation

1. These are official time controls, not my personal whim. It’s a not bad idea to play with the same time controls as in official tournaments. I don’t think the lack of official time control is very good for Lichess.
2. Users will be able to practice in games on Lichess how to spend time for games with the same controls as in real tournaments.
3. Lichess can gain new users, including strong grandmasters who enjoy thoughtful play.
4. Globally. For some strong players, Internet chess evokes negative associations due to the reduced time control. I think their dissatisfaction is partly justified, since currently we cannot even play on Lichess with the same time control as in real tournaments. Due to the implementation of official time controls, Internet chess will meet the interests of all chess players, not solely for rapid/blitz/bullet lovers.

5. Replies to possible counterarguments

5.1. “People don’t need this feature. A minority of players agree with you.”

1. What is this statement based on? Have representative surveys been conducted? If not, then such an opinion may be the case of “status quo bias”. See the book of John T. Jost “A Theory of System Justification” for details about it. Also, the book of Arie W. Kruglanski “The Psychology of Closed Mindedness” describes the psychological mechanisms of a common tendency among software developers to quickly reject user requests without thinking about them.
2. Remind once again that in real tournaments, people play with exactly the time control that I request in this issue. I have never read that there is a consensus among chess players that it’s necessary to cancel requested time controls. Lichess doesn’t implement a thing that chess organizations and players themselves don’t reject fundamentally.
3. Minority may vary. The role of a minority can be either 1 person or tens of thousands. As of the time of writing this issue 57,406 players played classic chess vs. 354,494 bullet players. I don’t think it’s a good idea to ignore the possible opinions of 57,406 players.
4. I believe that cannot be ruled out the factor that Lichess has fewer classical chess players than it could possibly be, also because it is still impossible to play on the Lichess with the official time controls. The relatively low interest in classical chess can be partially attributed to the lack of necessary functions for playing classical chess.
5. In our neoliberal era, producers must obey the wishes of consumers. But not everyone thinks that this is good, that we shouldn’t act in the “public interest”. When viewed in the context of chess, classical chess perhaps develops qualities such as deep thinking, calculating variations, perseverance, while blitz/bullet is used for consumers entertainment. Perhaps classical chess with its time control that is more in line with the concept of public interest. Interests of classical chess players lives matter.

5.2. “Except for you, no one wrote such requests”

1. If users want something, this doesn’t mean that they will write a GitHub issue or Lichess Feedback post. I’m an experienced GitHub user, at the time of this writing, I have written about 1300 GitHub issues, and based on my experience I know that unfortunately most users are inert. They don’t want to waste their time writing a detailed issue and enter into a possibly lengthy dialogue about it, preferring that someone else will do it for them. People like grandmaster Nikita Vityugov, who prefers classical chess to blitz, can simply leave the site without finding the functions they need. Likewise, users don’t write any other issues that they deem important. I believe that it’s wrong to ignore this factor when talk that users haven’t previously reported a particular problem.
2. See the Puzzletraining post of 2016 year, Just_let_it_be_904 post of 2018 on Lichess Feedback and the IsaVulpes’ issue #6169 of 2020. There have already been similar requests. This, of course, doesn’t mean that the request is very popular, but even for big projects 4 requests on any issue within 5+ years may indicate the stable interest of users.

Thanks.

[benediktwerner]

My counterargument would be "you can simulate this using the API" 😅

But yeah, it would be nice to have this built-in for normal users as well.

Duplicate of #6169 though

[Kristinita]

Type: Reply 💬

1. Summary

@benediktwerner, this isn’t a duplicate (and it would be strange on my part to write the same thing as in the issue I’m referring to).

Please take a closer look:

2. Time controls from issues

2.1. Time controls from the issue of @IsaVulpes

1. “90 minutes +30s/move; +30 minutes @ move 40”;
2. “120 minutes without increment; +60 minutes”;
3. “110 minutes +30s/move; +50 minutes”.

2.2. Time controls from my issue

1. “120 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 60 minutes for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 61”;
2. “The time control for each game is: 90 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 1”;
3. “The time control for each game is: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 50 minutes for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 1”.

2.3. Difference

Please note that issue #6169 doesn’t contain anything about changing the time control after 60 moves. The author of #6169 talks about additional changes in time control after the 40th move, but no more. But in official competitions, besides changes in time control after the 40th move, there can also be additional changes after the 60th move.

3. Conclusion

I think that my issue isn’t a duplicate, and it needs to be reopened. My issue contain a request for support for more complex time control.

Thanks.

[benediktwerner]

It's pretty much the same thing. The issue even contains discussion about other move numbers and if something like this were to be implemented it's rather unlikely we would just hard-code move 40.