15 Feb 07
The final sentence of my previous post should read: "Incidentally, if anyone wishes to have a good look at this endgame themselves, one of the main reasons it is drawn is that the defending side always seems to have stalemating resources when the pawns (or the attacking King) get too far advanced."
15 Feb 07
Originally posted by Northern LadYes, his games, as well as those of jimster, EddieT, and GauravV exemplify what I would call “retarded chess.”
I was amazed that, on the first opportunity (move 63), Meman voluntarily gave up the exchange, leading to the endgame Q + 2P (a+b) v Q whose assessment had been changed by the advent of the silicon monsters. Meman's engine preferred to defend an endgame it 'knew' to be a draw. No human player would dream of playing like that, since the techical draw that computers have found in this endgame requires only moves at a number of critical stages.
The substantial number of engine users prevalent in correspondence chess greatly taints the reputation of the game, and additionally casts doubt on players such as you who play the game legitimately. I suppose there is still hope that correspondence chess here will become more engine-free as this site prohibits engine use, and enforces the policy well.
I suspect many stronger players are unwilling to play CC due to fear of playing engines when they play one of the top players or fear of being accused of being one. Of course there are some legitimate top players, but based on my own experience, I think that their fear of potentially facing an engine is substantiated.
The reality is that anybody, even one with an elementary understanding of chess, may find the best moves with the aid of an engine. While wonderful for postgame analysis, this sucks for CC. However, a single game may be an indicator of engine use as you have just demonstrated.
I think it would be nice if higher rated players would thoroughly annotate a few of their games in the forums, explaining why one line is superior to another, and what would be even better, illuminating the entire thought process on how they arrived at the move they played.
Something like this:
http://www.towardsfreedom.com/veggiechess/games.html
This suggestion has been made before, but there is no incentive for a higher rated player to do this. So create an incentive. Perhaps create a forum for annotated games? Or create a sponsored tournament in which players who provide annotations to their games and answer questions regarding positions in that game are pooled into a lottery in which a player wins a free/reduced cost subscription?
I think the benefits would really outweigh the costs.
There would be so many benefits to this:
It would improve the quality of the chess forum, generating discussion regarding chess ideas.
The less-skilled players learn.
The engine users may become evident.
Plus stronger players may be attracted to the chess forums, and most essentially, players may be drawn to the site. (More money for Chris and Russ. 😉 ) One may tell much about the quality of a site based on the quality of the forums. This would a be a good way to be a step ahead of the competition.
15 Feb 07
Originally posted by YugaIt IS a great idea - but how many 2100+ players on RHP would be willing to spend the hours it takes for a full annotation?
Yes, his games, as well as those of jimster, EddieT, and GauravV exemplify what I would call “retarded chess.”
The substantial number of engine users prevalent in correspondence chess greatly taints the reputation of the game, and additionally casts doubt on players such as you who play the game legitimately. I suppose there is still hope that correspondenc ...[text shortened]... on the quality of the forums. This would a be a good way to be a step ahead of the competition.
If Russ and Chris could be convinced to give free subscriptions for it on the other hand...
However, here's where you've got another problem - you'll have 2100+ rated engine users trying to annotate games also. Sorry, but if I want to read an annotation by a low rated player I'll annotate my own games. This would bring more light on who's likely cheating, but in the meantime they'd be getting a free subscription - this would probably just increase the number of people willing to cheat, because now there would be something to gain from it.
15 Feb 07
Not only that, so many of the users on this site are from non-English speaking countries. The quality of an annotation might not be indicative of the chess skill of a player with poor English; there then may be people unfairly accused of cheating.
However a cool feature might be the ability to post annotated games in your profile, maybe with the ability for other users to leave comments (sort of like a facebook wall). That way when someone finishes a time-consuming annotation they can have it forever if they so choose, rather than watching it drop out of sight on the forums.
15 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Northern LadQuite the long game... 😕
My longest game so far is Game 1078193 ... (more text to follow)
16 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Ramiri15It's quite easy to do, post an annotated game into a blogger or the likes, then put the link in your profile.
Not only that, so many of the users on this site are from non-English speaking countries. The quality of an annotation might not be indicative of the chess skill of a player with poor English; there then may be people unfairly accused of cheating.
However a cool feature might be the ability to post annotated games in your profile, maybe with the abili ...[text shortened]... can have it forever if they so choose, rather than watching it drop out of sight on the forums.
Everybody could see it! 😉
But there's still the problem of incentive, a lot of top players might not even care. It's a time consuming process - especially if there's not an engine. I just annotated a game for a 1400ish player and it took me about 1-1.5 hr. for 22 moves in a very straightforward game with few side variations to calculate - I didn't use an engine, but I did have Fritz check stuff that I put up. The games at the level NorthernLad plays at are much, much more complex and take a lot longer to annotate - at least I'd assume, especially if things get complex - not to mention few games at that level last only 22 moves.
16 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMasterYeah I know, but by placing an "annotate game" option, people might be more inclined to take advantage of it. Plus, it would have the game history board there and it would be part of the site, so it would have that 'RHP' feel to it.
It's quite easy to do, post an annotated game into a blogger or the likes, then put the link in your profile.
Everybody could see it! 😉
But there's still the problem of incentive, a lot of top players might not even care. It's a time consuming process - especially if there's not an engine. I just annotated a game for a 1400ish player and it took m ecially if things get complex - not to mention few games at that level last only 22 moves.
Anyway, I'm just brainstorming 😛. Any ideas from you?
16 Feb 07
Originally posted by Ramiri15Here's an idea - how about people not cheat to boost their own horribly low self esteem?
Yeah I know, but by placing an "annotate game" option, people might be more inclined to take advantage of it. Plus, it would have the game history board there and it would be part of the site, so it would have that 'RHP' feel to it.
Anyway, I'm just brainstorming 😛. Any ideas from you?
Your idea does sound good though actually, but I think a lot of them wouldn't make use of it - there'd need to be an incentive. I.e. people could rate the annotations (qualified people that is) and if they got a good enough rating they could get X months free per annotation.
16 Feb 07
Originally posted by cmsMasterSort of like a rec system 😉? I guess that might work; a peer judging system would make it difficult for cheaters to get a free ride.
Here's an idea - how about people not cheat to boost their own horribly low self esteem?
Your idea does sound good though actually, but I think a lot of them wouldn't make use of it - there'd need to be an incentive. I.e. people could rate the annotations (qualified people that is) and if they got a good enough rating they could get X months free per annotation.
27 Mar 07
2 edits
Clan League - 3 Day Timeout, 7 Day Timebank : Season 4.
Start: Oct 2nd 2006.
Finish: Mar 27th 2007.
114 moves. Draw!
Game 2572996.
Frank played well. And he´s a gentleman. He had twice for claim
the win for move timeout. It´s called "honor". Too much different
as players who claim win for move timeout on New Year Day with
my vacation flag up... ðŸ˜
EDIT: the Northern Lad game was played against a computer.