Anticipate move

Can't see if this has been asked before, and might be a hard change to implement. Still, if you don't ask...

I'd like to be able to do the following when submitting a move. In a similar box to the 'Send a message' box, I'd like to be able to have a different box where I could put two annotated moves, the first being the move I expect my opponent to make and then the move I will make if he does so.

In this way when my opponent moves, he will immediately see my move and be able to put in another move straight away. If he does something different then it throws my guess away.

This could be extended past this for example to further turns, or further possible moves, but for now I'd love to know if this is feasible.

Thanks.

It was mentioned a long time ago, and several times since then.
Its a good idea, maybe it will happen one day.

I second that idea

While it is a great idea. I can easily think of a handful of reasons of why it will NOT be implemented.

1.User complaints: There will be people who will claim they never entered in a "Next" move. There will be people that claim that the "Next" move that was made was not the one they specified. There will be people who demand that the game be drawn/deleted/reset as a result.

2. Site performance: In order to implement a feature such as that, you will be adding an additional query to EVERY move that is made. (that adds up) This is similar to why you MUST click on the "Claim Draw" checkbox. Because it is too much overhead to check for "Drawn" status every move. The difference is: the person clicking the "claim draw" checkbox; is generally the one who WANTS the draw and has to make a conscience decision to check for a draw. If somebody had to click a "check for Next move" option every move, well it would defeat the purpose of the system and almost make the feature worthless.

Like I said, a great idea that will most likely not be implemented for a variety of reasons.

--tmetzler

1. Surely the same people could claim they never made a normal move as well. Assuming the system works as suggested, it is as watertight as any normal move so would be as debatable as those. Which is to say, not at all. Easier to accidentally click on the wrong square I'd have thought than to enter in an accidental notated move.

2. The 'Claim Draw' algorithm would be quite complex and it is understandable that they don't want to run it on every move. This code would be quite straight-forward processor-wise and the overhead would be negligible. (I'm a database developer luckily.) It would involve some simple text-parsing and then some basic move checking - the routines for which are already written.

Sam.

Point #1. I think you would have a greater chance of somebody complaining from entering in the wrong move, than from clicking on the squares. But really this is just a case of tough luck, but a hassle either way.

#2. How many moves do you guess are made on RHP every second? How many of those moves actually NEED to check for a "Next move" in the queue? It sure seems like a whole lot of extra overhead for the system to have to check for "next" moves EVERY time just to satisfy the .001 % of moves that would need it. (Number pulled out of my ass, of course). Not to mention the extra resources and "fun programming" required in order to handle the next next move and the next next next move....

I like the idea, I would use it; but I also understand why it probably won't be implemented. RHP does a damn fine job of running fast and being stable. Adding features like this would surely add to the complexity of "simple tasks" like recording moves.

--tmetzler

Conditional moves are common practice in postal chess. There are many anecdotes about the dangers of conditional moves for the unwary. The one I like is where White opens 1 d4. Black replies with 1 g6 and writes a little note saying "whatever your second move, I will reply with Bg7". When the game arrives back in the post, Black finds to his horror that White has played 2 Bh6 ! So he has to resign the game.

I see gameknot now has thie feature

This is a 'to do' job. It is perfectly feasible.

-Russ

How is it coming along out of interest?

Been a while!

Originally posted by tmetzler
Point #1. I think you would have a greater chance of somebody complaining from entering in the wrong move, than from clicking on the squares. But really this is just a case of tough luck, but a hassle either way.

#2. How many moves do you guess are made on RHP every second? How many of those moves actually NEED to check for a "Next move" in the queue ...[text shortened]... ould surely add to the complexity of "simple tasks" like recording moves.

--tmetzler

I have been waiting for a "Next Move" option for years on this site. I'm glad I searched before posting the question yet again, because most of the relevant points have been made already. The only thing I would add to refute the 'erroneous entry' complaints is to have a "Play It" link that would play the proposed moves in order and display them on the board. This would also serve to validate that the move entered is valid. I'm picturing a UI feature like 'Plan Next Moves'. A board pops up as with Analize feature, and user 'records' the next series of anticipated moves. Usr then has the opportunity to Play It (step through one move at a time) and/or Save.

As for storing multiple moves in a row, I think a single field could be stored to represent a cascade of moves, like "b6, cxb6, Bxb6, Rxb6". The only real downfall is what happens to the string if someone moves something else? The whole string would need to be obliterated, since if it was saved after the next move and not edited, then a subsequent move could be disastrous or impossible. Should the sequence follow as anticipated by the Next Move feature, then the moves in question would be played/removed from the string.

Of course, it must be possible to exercise this feature no matter whose move it is on the board.

Originally posted by Russ
This is a 'to do' job. It is perfectly feasible.

-Russ

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
whats the point of having a time bank if a player can move three moves at a time.

i think this gives the advantage to higher rated players.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
A player can only make three moves at a time if they successfully predict their opponent's replies. Furthermore, if they plan in advance to play those moves, they will not need to use much time on them, whether RHP supports conditional moves or not. I fail to see how anyone is getting an unfair advantage here.