ACWC Info

I am in!

2 + 5 is too much in my opinion. Skill is indeed a matter of understanding the game, but doing so quickly is an essential part for me. Therefore I was thinking more of an 1 +1 TC in the first and something like 3 + 1 in the second tourney.

I am in.

And yes, do not say that human-like bots are not allowed. Not a word has been said about this anywhere. No discrimination!

See you in the Candidates tournament :-)

I am sorry, but bots are not allowed to play in the ACWC, If you would like to join on your main account you can.

hey @Hastinsson I think 1+1 really is too short for a game to be serious: it would get all about tactics and nothing about strategy. I think the increment should be at least 2 seconds because it often happens to get into complex endgames. But the main point is that I am trying to organize a "World championship": to be called like this there needs to be a decent time control. I am not saying we should have 3 -4 hours games like in chess, but I have not seen yet a bullet world championship. Let's be clear: I have nothing against an elite bullet tournament, but it would just be a bullet tournament and not a WC. I suggested 2+5 because it is my opinion that anti games need increment much more then other variants, while the opening can be played fast (the crazyhouse WC has a 3+2 time control). If the majority of people prefers to play 3+2, I am fine with it; but it has to be a blitz time control. Let's not forget there are also players who have no access to good connection and who could not be able to compete in a bullet match.

It is my personal opinion that since time does not influence the evaluation of the position in antichess (as it happens for example in bughouse) time is not really part of the game: it is just a way to give a limit to the game, so that a player can't stall forever. I don't really want time to be an issue for the players, and I think everyone should have the time to calculate and not just be forced to follow instinct. Let's also add that many players here are very experienced and know theory deeply: it is obvious that players who haven't played too much will take more time to make their decisions and would be unfair to reward only the experience.

I think 2+5 is too fast actually, even while I'm very much a bullet enthusiast. If we want to distinguish between the players' strategical skills, 2 minutes initial time is not enough. Let's say you play 6 moves instantly out of pure opening theory (getting your time to 2:30) and then start actually thinking, you can only do 5 or 6 moves if you think 30 seconds each move on average and then you're already in time trouble. That's not a lot. +5 increment is fine for me, but I'm in favor of a higher initial time - perhaps 5 minutes?

I'm in! Thanks for setting this up, it sounds really exciting :D

@the-lone-wolf , I certainly agree on a few things you say, taking the time to think is an essential part of antichess, more than in some other variants. But giving faster, more experienced players a chance would be also fair in my opinion, we are no less tactical, playing moves can be about calculating different positions in a blink of an eye. So I would say, play a very short TC-tournament and a long TC- tournament to have the best fast and slow players, and throw them together in a final round maybe with a intermediate TC?

I'm in.