[feature-request] New Rating Category for Longer Time Controls

@PhillipTheTank

This may very well be the reason for why lichess is so skewed towards fast time controls, but I don't agree with it. When I play slow time controls/correspondence, I'm aware that it's easier for the opponent to cheat because they can just cheat on a different device, whereas in blitz or bullet they have to use some kind of script onsite or switch tabs quickly.
So this is an annoying factor (and I would always expect lichess to do its best against cheaters in all time controls), but since we're only playing for rating points and not for money, it's a nuisance I'm willing to deal with.
By neglecting slow time controls, lichess may be keeping out some cheaters, but it's also disregarding a big and important part of online chess experience.

@Bonifratz
I agree. The main purpose of playing chess is the fun of it. I do not want to play against some machine when I did not choose so - but still, I could learn from a game that I thought I played against some human user and in fact I played against a machine.
I'd like to have

This sounds like a good idea. +1

Bonifratz 1 week ago #61
@PhillipTheTank

"This may very well be the reason for why lichess is so skewed towards fast time controls, but I don't agree with it. When I play slow time controls/correspondence, I'm aware that it's easier for the opponent to cheat because they can just cheat on a different device, whereas in blitz or bullet they have to use some kind of script onsite or switch tabs quickly."

This is completely false. It is FACT it is just as easy to cheat at fast time controls. I won't go into methods used, a 2nd device is not required. I suggest educating yourself before making such assumptions. It is this unwarranted "chat" that unfairly creates an atmosphere of correspondence players are more likely to cheat because of the longer time control.
Cheating is a matter of character. If one so chooses this behavior, they will find a way to do it, no matter the time control. Cheating at bullet is just as prevalent as any other time control.

I am all for establishing a new rating category for the longer time controls, say 20 minutes+. Traditionally, 10-20 minute games have been called rapid, longer games classical. Maybe eventually lichess will find a way to implement this and be more inline with the common terminology at other chess sites.

@mdinnerspace

I think you misunderstood my post. I didn't mean to say that cheating was less prevalent in bullet, just that it takes a bit more effort to do it and that it's easier to catch. In bullet, you don't have time to manually enter each move in some engine program and look for the best continuation; instead, what is commonly used is some kind of third-party software that either moves by itself or shows you the best continuation on the board. This is easier to catch because it leads to some patterns that can be detected by lichess.

On the other hand, in a correspondence or slow classical game, what's to stop a player from switching on a second device and having Stockfish calculate the best moves? If a player uses that kind of help only at some crucial moments during a game, and if they are careful to always use a "human" amount of time, their play will be virtually indistinguishable from that of a master.

I am aware of the methods used. As I said, I don't believe the forums is a place to discuss the "how to's" or who may or may not.
I'm not saying to put heads in the sand, to completely ignore the topic. Education is a starting point. The mentality, the psychology I even started a thread awhile back. Point I was making here was that the practice is not started because it is "easy" to do. It is a conscious choice, the difficulty of becomes secondary.

@Illion: It doesn't take a millisecond to compare two numbers, it takes a fraction of a nanosecond. It takes seconds to sort 215 million integers.

@mdinnerspace
"Cheating is a matter of character. If one so chooses this behavior, they will find a way to do it, no matter the time control. Cheating at bullet is just as prevalent as any other time control.

I am all for establishing a new rating category for the longer time controls, say 20 minutes+. Traditionally, 10-20 minute games have been called rapid, longer games classical. Maybe eventually lichess will find a way to implement this and be more inline with the common terminology at other chess sites."

I think you are right, and so do I think that would be better if we call a spade a spade (I mean separating rapid from classical long games).

good idea ! +1

Well, but there never seems to appear some consideration from Mr Lichess, does there? We keep guessing what might be the advantages or disadvantages of such a new category - but what do the bosses of this site think? Maybe there are good reasons to change nothing. Of course there need not have to be an answer on every strange idea that appears here - but this question has been asked so many times.