I like these game clocks they use in ultimate pool
I have played tournament chess, yes. Got the top of the line chess clock packed away in a cabinet in my game room, and a nice Staunton set..Have you yourself, ever used a chess clock for an entire game of anything?
I have played tournament chess, yes. Got the top of the line chess clock packed away in a cabinet in my game room, and a nice Staunton set..
And I see where you are going with this. The "incovenience" to the players. Which I care not a whit for, if trying different things leads to more viewers. The time pressure applied to a slow player later in the match would be great fun to watch, for me personally.
And using a chess clock means the tournament matches finish on time, every time. Which is good for scheduling televised matches, without having to edit matches. There are a lot of different reasons a chess clock type setup could drive viewership. Who cares what old school, hardened gamblers and tournament players think about it? What they have been doing has not been working.
I would give more per shot. The shot clock for last 16 is controlled by an official. A chess clock is controlled by the player so you need some extra seconds to walk to the clock.I would vote one minute per "race to" with a 30 second increment. So for a race to nine, nine minutes + 30 second increment. If a player has zero time left, it's a time foul and BIH for the opponent and they get the 30 second increment.
Benefits of this set up:
- if a player is low on time, this is basically a 30 second shot clock so a player is never too rushed
- BIH is a big enough incentive to not get low on time
- no complaints about a player winning solely on time
40sec shot clock would be fine. 40sec from when they get TO the table. If you can't decide/play in 40sec you shouldn't be in the event.I would give more per shot. The shot clock for last 16 is controlled by an official. A chess clock is controlled by the player so you need some seconds to walk to the clock.
Also players in my opinion should be allowed to take a little time. Just not ages. Watching rushed matches full of mistakes is the other extreme.
Nobody shoots from their chair either, what was the point??Nobody gets up out of a chair to move a chess piece.
I think you are greatly simplifying how it would work, and not seeing the advantages. It would be some sort of button by each player's chair that they tap when they go back to their seat. The image you have of chess clocks might be from watching blitz games. Set up for pool competition, there would be plenty of time to tap your clock, without "banging" your clock.That’s just silly. lol your not sitting at a table banging a clock the second you move your piece like chess
Your clock starts running the moment your opponent hits the clock.40sec shot clock would be fine. 40sec from when they get TO the table. If you can't decide/play in 40sec you shouldn't be in the event.
Time per shot, with players hitting their own clock, simply won't work. It would severely interrupt the player's rhythym. Plus, it is stupid to force a player to walk back to their chair every shot. It also allows two hacks that can't hit the end rail to have a 4 hour match, as long as they complete each shot in the per-shot time period.Chess has a time per game, pool should have a time per shot. You can buy all kinds of clocks, they should be able to make ones that work like pool clocks. A tablet would work, and that could have an app programmed any way you want. You can buy cheap tablets for under $100. The timer countdown would be large and easy to see.
The clock/tablet would be at a center table between the chairs of the two players. There’s a 10 sec sound, and you need to hit the button before the final buzzer sounds or it’s a foul. Yes you’d need to go hit the button after each shot. And things could get ridiculous with people rushing to hit the clock before it buzzes, but it would still be better than no shot clock.