Date & Time stamps

[Blockhead]

I'd like to see Date & Time stamps on *all* moves played.

At the moment only those moves just to the left of the game dialog have date, move number, and colour. Several moves could be made on the same day giving no indication as to the time or frequency.

An agreed time standard such as GMT would be fine (for me!), even better if it configurable from within the player page.

What are the chances Stan?

[Stan Steliga]

It would be tough to work the date and times of all moves into the current game pages - because of the space they would take. Most pople probably would not want that added information on the page. However - I could maybe make that an option. I do store the times of the moves. I think that would be a subscriber-only option. Let me see what I can do.

[blott]

Stan, for what it's worth, I like the idea of being able to see date/time stamps for all moves as well. And having it be a subscriber option, all the better...

[bellesbabe]

Not really anything I need to see. However if others are for it, then so be it.

[Johnny5]

I quite like the idea and think it would be quite beneficial for others too

[Blockhead]

admin said:

It would be tough to work the date and times of all moves into the current game pages - because of the space they would take. Most pople probably would not want that added information on the page. However - I could maybe make that an option. I do store the times of the moves. I think that would be a subscriber-only option. Let me see what I can do.

I know you and savin very busy right now but I wondered if you'd given this idea more thought Stan

[Stan Steliga]

No further progress on this, but it is on my list.

[fllar]

Is this really essential to have 'date and time stamps'. !! F

[fllar]

Ooops hit the wrong button. lol lol. Will this be a 'means' to try and change the existing move process (regarding slow play, etc. ) that has been suggested in previous post. A thought.!!

[Stan Steliga]

I'm not sure what you are asking fllar, but we are looking at the whole pace situation to try to come up with some better controls for those that want it.

[fllar]

Hi, Stan. In the past the discussion regarding pace of play has not been productive in finding a solution. It was in general thought that due to peoples situations not all could honour the original agreed pace of play at the offset of a game due to individual circumstances. When the 'Date and Time Stamp' is implemented could this be used as away to gather imformation on how the site as a whole keeps to the required pace of play...!

[Stan Steliga]

The addition of the date/time stamp is only a change to what is displayed. We have been storing the date and time of all moves for a few years now (before that we just stored the date). So, we actually have the ability now to check how the pace has been adhered to. This will take some significant analysis however, and we have been too busy with other enhancements. The other thing is that the pace has always been a guideline and not a hard rule. I had hoped that the site would run in a more relaxed mode, where people didn't worry too much about the pace of the games - and I thought people would honor the pace agreed on more. I guess both of those assumptions were nieve on my part. When I started this site, I never dreamed that it would blossom the way it has.

What I want to do for the future is add some optional strict pace settings, so if both players want to have a strict pace, then they can choose a new strict pace setting in the challenges, but I do not want to force a strict pace on all new games. An "old style" unenforced pace will always be available (I hope) for players that don't want a strict pace.

[savin]

Stan and I spent a signbificant amount of energy analyzing the "pace of game" question about 18 months ago. On the surface it looked like an easy problem, but the more we peeled back the layers of the onion the more complex it became.

We also looked and how the official corresspondence chess organization handles tournaments and pace of play. This is the ICCF, and they charge about $25-$45 per 10 game tournament and have significant resources. They avoid many of the problems by having a pace of game which requires a player to make 10 moves in 60 days -- a pace that is slower than most games at Stan's NetChess. This means that a game might only be on move 10 after over 100 days (60 days for each player to make 10 moves!!).

We eventually decided that we:

1) probably need to change the names of the current options. The fastest possible pace of play is one move every 24 hours. Faster speeds are only possible if the two players live in very close time zones. But one player in Sydney, Australia playing someone in New York City will have a hard time making more than one move per day. So any pacde faster than 1 move a day is silly -- it can't be enforced. If you add to the fact that everryone will have a day of two when they can't get online and you quickly see that a super fact game has a pace of 5 moves in 7 days. The ICCF would give 30 days to make 5 moves!! Our thought was to have 3 paces of play. 10 moves in 15 days, 10 moves in 30 days and 10 moves in 60 days as three sensible choices (Fast, Medium, Slow)

2) Because of time zone difference we need to to not start tracking time until the first 24 hours have gone by. So everyone gets the first 24 hours for "free", its like you took zero time if you take less than 24 hours to move. This is about what the ICCF does. If you reply within 24 hours its considered than you took zero days to reply. this way a person in NYC hass no advanteg over a person in the UK. Without this the person in NY make a move just after the player in the UK went to bed and WHAM!!! the player in the UK gets charged with at least 8 hours just because they are alseep.

3) To track the time would require a complete overhaul of the move engine. We would also need the ability to allow playerrs to turn clocks on and off.

4) Most players would probably be happy continuing to use the 3, 7, 14, 30 day forfeit rules.

[reyn]

admin said:

The other thing is that the pace has always been a guideline and not a hard rule. I had hoped that the site would run in a more relaxed mode, where people didn't worry too much about the pace of the games - and I thought people would honor the pace agreed on more. I guess both of those assumptions were nieve on my part.

Stan,

I'm betting that most players (including myself) wouldn't be so in favour of an inprovement to the pace set-up if some players tried to be more reasonable to sticking to the agreed upon pace. It's only when someone waits a week or a lot more on a game in which one move per day is expected.

How many times have we heard of some using the forfeit time as "pace time"? Too many, I'm afraid. It just takes the fun out of it when you're somebody who hates games that drag horribly. Human nature is what it is.

By the way, I like the idea of your "strick pace". The fact that you are offering as optional is fair, too.

Another point that I would like to advance here is an improvement to Challenge Central. There are a fair number of players (including myself) who prefer to put some kind of restriction on their challenges, for example, rating level. Any chance of any future action there?

[Johnny5]

I'm with you on this one Reyn!