Fast Correspondence Tournaments


Yes. Any group member can create tournaments.

I would only add that if you are doing so from the ‘Fast Correspondence Group’ page then it should be a fast correspondence tournament.


I was thinking about few players (5 to 10), roundrobin, 1 round, SDK, fast paced.

I’m not planning to do it soon because on dec 31th will start “Beat the kyu, be a dan 2019” which I suscribed and is already SDK and fast. But for the future I’d like a tournament that takes only one round.


@lysnew how fast is beat the kyu, be a Dan ?

And maybe how fast can fast correspondence tournaments be expected to be in general? I find they are usually still pretty slow but maybe I have the wrong perspective. E.g Scorpio’s tournament started 7 weeks ago and has not yet finished the first round. Is this fast?


The “Fast Correspondence - $Month $Year ($Index)” tournaments usually end within 1 month (some games may take 2 moths) and they are only 1 round, so there will no further rounds starting at unexpected times.


“Fast” may have several meanings. :slight_smile:

Fast timesetting bring fast games, but the “zodiac” tournaments are double elimination, so they will take a long time to end (many rounds).

Also “beat the kyu” tournaments will take a long time to end (9 rounds). But the timesettings are quite fast for me:
2018 - Clock starts with 3 days and increments by 8 hours per move up to a maximum of 1 week
2019 - Clock starts with 3 days and increments by 12 hours per move up to a maximum of 1 week.

Here the “fast” is the time increment that means 2-3 moves per day at least.

I enjoyed very much “Really fast correspondence” tournament with Canadian Byo-Yomi: Clock starts with 1 day main time, followed by 1 day per 10 stones. But many players did time out.


You are crazy man :smile:
The time-management in that tournament was more difficult then the actual games.
I had full day appointments on that weekends. On Friday nights I had to stop playing when I had 1 stone left in my byo-yomi period to play the last move in the morning (to not timeout over the day). The same from Saturday to Sunday.
And different timezones/online-times had their own difficulties. If your opponent got to bad an hour later, you lost 8 hours over night on your clock.

It was fun, but if you want to do other things but looking every hour on your phone for pending moves, …


I had actually some problem with taiwan players. :smiley:
Sleeping hours were an issue in that case.

I tried to replicate the timesettings in a slightly slower pace: 1 day main time, followed by 1 day per 5 stones.
Since I often check my phone for pending moves, it means for my opponent 3 to 5 moves per day.

Six challenges accepted:

  • 2 annuled because opponent didn’t play a move
  • 1 TO after 8 moves
  • 3 TO after 72, 112 and 158 moves respectively

Sadly, people doesn’t pay much attention to timesettings when accepting a challenge.

I think now that building a good friends-list is a better way to have fast correspondence games.
Creating small tournaments could be a way to do so.


I’m not quite sure, if it’s the correct thread to put my question in. Anyway…

Will there be tournaments like this one

in February? I do love them and the last couple of months the signing in for the first one started at the end of the previous month.


I don’t know how the official tournaments are set up, but I threw up an ad-hoc round robin in the group.


The 2d +8h Round Robin tournaments I create occasionally have analysis disabled because I like to think them as “very slow games” instead of just plain correspondence. Given the fact that some users don’t like that, let me throw a poll here to know the numbers.

Thanks in advance for voting!

  • It’s cool, I prefer analysis disabled
  • It’s not cool, I prefer analysis enabled

0 voters


Ironically, I was thinking of created a tournament with this exact reasoning - and highlighting the gentleperson’s agreement that the only “thinking” would be done “in the head”


I don’t care if someone uses analysis while I don’t (actually I disabled it in my profile).

Also analysis is necessary to allow conditional moves.
If someone likes to play conditional moves in my games I’m very happy, so I prefer analysis to be enabled for my opponent.


I think this poll is combining two different questions. I don’t know how to vote.

I generally prefer to keep analysis enabled for any speed of correspondence games, but I am also okay with there being tournaments that have it disabled.


Same. I need an “I don’t care option.”

I like conditional moves. I can live without them.


i try not to use analyzer mostly, but also think it better to give people options.


I clarify then. This question goes for these tournaments specificly. There are only two possibilities for me: to enable them or to disable them. I think the “I don’t care” option would be not to vote. The “I think it better to give people options” and “I want my opponent to be able to play conditional moves” arguments would then be votes for enabling analysis. Makes sense?


Good clarification.

It’s the spirit in which I voted “It’s cool”: I would like there to be tournaments where analysis is disabled.

Last time there was one, my reading improved noticeably. I’d like to do that again. I hear the arguments that say “you can just not use it” or “you can disable it for yourself”. These do not apply to me, because they are not true for me. I only enjoy playing without analysis if I know this is the agreement with my opponent.

These are the reasons why I voted “it’s cool”.

There are plenty of opportunities to play with analysis on in tournaments. It is rare to have the opportunity where it is turned off.



I like analysis for two reasons:

First, it fits the spirit of “correspondence” for me. The idea, in my mind, is to play the best moves, and to study the position. If I don’t want to do that, I should play live games. Granted, some people don’t have time for live games, and want the same experience in a multi-day game, but that’s my feeling on it. If I can’t use the analysis board to actually study the variations, it’s a slow game, but not a correspondence one.

Second, I get impatient and like conditional moves. Especially in the endgame, being able to input five sente endgame moves in a row with their presumed follow ups is a huge time saver.


Yes, but this is why there is “Correspondence” and then there is “FAST Correspondence”.

I can’t play live - my circumstances never give me that opportunity.

But I like the live-like aspect of Fast Correspondence. Which you did acknowledge the possibility of - it probably explains why the votes are split: there are two different groups of people being served by the same type of tournament!