Forums

Winners were Hamilton A 26, 2nd Dundee A 18, 3rd Stepps 17.
Section 2, Wandering Dragons
Section 3, Zebras

Report with cross-table will appear soon on main website.

Regarding increments, I can see advantages for 4min+2sec over 3+2, but the latter is more standard. Of course clocks can be set to either, but 3+2 is a standard supplied setting on the clocks we used whereas 4+2 would require specific programming for each clock and take much longer to set up.

Yesterday produced a wide range of questions about various kinds of illegal move, some quite tricky.

Ken , thanks again for organising.
The 5/0 was enjoyable and our illegal move dispute decision was accepted amicably.
If you have a proposal for different time control please raise at CS AGM as I wish to raise a case for the defence of 5/0.

Yes thanks to Ken for organising again.

5 0 works well no need change.

Just use 3+2 then - it's the international standard. 4+2 is also fine but if it's a hassle then no need in my opinion.

If we're going to keep 5+0, can we also go back to analogue clocks and smoking at the board? Thanks.

Alan Tate Wrote:Just use 3+2 then - it's the international standard. 4+2 is also fine but if it's a hassle then no need in my opinion.

If we're going to keep 5+0, can we also go back to analogue clocks and smoking at the board? Thanks.

This.

3+2 would be nice. Clocks can do increments now. That's a good thing. It means it's 'a quick chess game' rather than 'some chess followed by flinging pieces around randomly'.

(Thanks, incidentally, to Ken for organising as ever, and congratulations to Hamilton, who were far, far too good for everyone else on the day.)