|
The Last Thing We Need... |
||
|
March 27, 2003 |
||
|
The bane of the modern correspondence chess player is not computer engine use, obnoxious opponents, the phoney day transit time, or other similar distractions. The problem is having too many choices to choose from. There are too many choices today, too many places to play, and not enough time to comprehend what is really going on. Chess playing server technology, while difficult to understand, is not rocket science. Therefore, servers are sprouting up all over the place. Some of these (like the Casual CC Server here at CC.COM) are primitive and serve their purpose of providing a limited service to very casual players. Serious correspondence chess it is not. There is a vast, untapped resource of potential players out there who, for now, are perfectly content to play casual games under relaxed conditions. How many email (or server, for the purpose of this discussion) games can you play simultaneously while keeping your playing strength at an acceptable level? A recent CCN Poll asked that question and the biggest responses were as follows:1-10 games (35%); 16-20 games (27%); 11-15 games (23%). It would seem, for the majority, that gone are the old days in the postal era where you could easily maintain a game load of 30-50 games, due to extended postal delivery times. Unfortunately, the number of tournaments, servers, and organizations have increased to such an extent that the average tournament player is having a hard time coping with the proliferation of possibilities. The number of games he can carry at one time is less, while the number of playing choices are more. |
Some people cannot cope at all and overextend themselves on a regular basis - in case you are wondering, I have done this as well. Using the forecast feature of EloQuery, the ICCF's excellent rating program, you can find players with 50, 75, or even 100 games pending at once (perhaps exceptionally even more than that). How is that possible, particularly if they are mostly email games? That is not playing correspondence chess any more than 1 or 3 minute speed games resemble over the board chess. I'm trying to imagine what it must be like with 100 email games pending at once. When I think how much bookkeeping work 10 games is, sending off emails, double-checking everything, etc., when you multiply that by 10 times it seems to me that it would be an incredible chore. But, whatever takes your elevator to the top floor is okay with me. :) What we don't need are more tournaments, servers, and organizations. While competition between the various providers does often result in more interesting choices, it does not change the fact that the average player is puzzled when confronted with all of these choices. It fragments the correspondence chess community in general and does not promote friendly relations, as everyone is busy carrying out their own agendas. Novice cc players, in particular, have no clue on how to go about making rational choices. Complicating things even more are organizations which offer worthless "international" titles because they have members from many different countries, run "World Championship" events, and other questionable activities. The last thing we need are more choices! |
|