18 Jun 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundYou should re-name your clan "The smell of Pooh", in honor of the crappy level of play you bring to it.
what, yours?
just for you
http://media.thechrispirilloshow.com/mp3/yourepitiful.mp3
you're pitiful
you're pitiful
you're pitiful its true.
never had a date
that you couldn't inflate
and you smell repulsive too
what a bummer being you
🙂
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundSo say you move once in a 1/x game that has a preloaded move and that's it for that session. You still have 24 hours before your timebank starts running. Really, if you aren't prepared to move at least once every 24 hours then what are you doing playing 1 day timeout games? Also, why can you yourself not also use preloaded moves?
Let me make couple of assertions.
1. the player in question is a sub, and has a lot of games in play >50 say.
2. He is interested in a friendly game of e-mail chess.
3. he doesnt have hours of time to play his moves.
He looks at his games and sees 30 games to move in. so does the best he can to make the moves he can in the time he has (lets say ...[text shortened]... t the PC because you want to speed things up, but dont want to attend to your games in person?
So let's think of the implementation of preloaded moves. In an average game you play (say 45 moves) how many moves do you think will be preloaded by an opponent of a similar level? How many do you think will actually be acted upon (remember, if you play a move different from the expected one the preloaded move is wasted)? How many extra hours of time will your clock be running for in the example 1/x game (number of premoves acted upon * average number of hours oppoenent takes to respond)?
Now let's ask a related question. Say a computer script exists such that a player can tell the script to make reply moves that it preloads into it's memory as soon as the game is moved in. The script does nothing but allow a basic "if Bxe5 then Nxe5" type input for every game. It also gives no stress to the RHP servers (refreshing a page every minute would be bad obviously).
By your logic this would be gaining an unfair advantage and therefore cheating yes?
18 Jun 06
1 edit
Originally posted by XanthosNZSo say you move once in a 1/x game that has a preloaded move and that's it for that session. You still have 24 hours before your timebank starts running. Really, if you aren't prepared to move at least once every 24 hours then what are you doing playing 1 day timeout games? Also, why can you yourself not also use preloaded moves?
So say you move once in a 1/x game that has a preloaded move and that's it for that session. You still have 24 hours before your timebank starts running. Really, if you aren't prepared to move at least once every 24 hours then what are you doing playing 1 day timeout games? Also, why can you yourself not also use preloaded moves?
So let's think of the i ly).
By your logic this would be gaining an unfair advantage and therefore cheating yes?
But with this proposed change to the system, you are not moving once in 24 hours, you are being forced to move maybe three times in one session, with the preloaded guy not attending to his game until the "your move" sign shows up he could be away from the game for three days, which would normally be a game lost.
This is correspondance chess, i just personally do not see the advantage in having such an addition,apart from allowing higher rated players the chance to dismiss a game he/she believes is not worth attendance.
A quote from an earlier post. "In a game between a 1200 and 1300 the preloaded moves won't be much use except in the opening or in occasions of forced moves. And in those cases rating doesn't matter so much as vision depth isn't really a factor."
Your words, showing that you agree that this is a proposal more useful for higher rated players, yes?
So let's think of the implementation of preloaded moves. In an average game you play (say 45 moves) how many moves do you think will be preloaded by an opponent of a similar level? How many do you think will actually be acted upon (remember, if you play a move different from the expected one the preloaded move is wasted)? How many extra hours of time will your clock be running for in the example 1/x game (number of premoves acted upon * average number of hours oppoenent takes to respond)?
It would be easy for a high rated player to play standard openings entirely preloaded, yes? And assuming time delay, a player could leave a 3/7 game unattended for 9 days.
Assuming immediate moving, a player could be forced (not sure if that is the right word) to play three moves in a possible game winning set piece in one sitting, yes?
Now let's ask a related question. Say a computer script exists such that a player can tell the script to make reply moves that it preloads into it's memory as soon as the game is moved in. The script does nothing but allow a basic "if Bxe5 then Nxe5" type input for every game. It also gives no stress to the RHP servers (refreshing a page every minute would be bad obviously).
By your logic this would be gaining an unfair advantage and therefore cheating yes?
I'm not sure if you are trying to trip me up here, but i would have to say that it was cheating, but the point is this "if you go to all that trouble to preload moves in this way, why cant you just move as normal?"
The current "play one move then wait for the other guy" system seems to work fine, i see no evidence that the status quo is a problem to game play, and you have not convinced me that it is.
I hope you accept that, right or wrong, i have the right to my opinion regardless of my rating. If that right hadn't been brought into question, i would've stopped posting some time ago as i believe i have already stated my case at least twice.
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundBut with this proposed change to the system, you are not moving once in 24 hours, you are being forced to move maybe three times in one session, with the preloaded guy not attending to his game until the "your move" sign shows up he could be away from the game for three days, which would normally be a game lost.
But with this proposed change to the system, you are not moving once in 24 hours, you are being forced to move maybe three times in one session, with the preloaded guy not attending to his game until the "your move" sign shows up he could be away from the game for three days, which would normally be a game lost.
This is correspondance chess, i ...[text shortened]... ting some time ago as i believe i have already stated my case at least twice.
You actually aren't being forced to move twice in a session. For example, if I'm needing to catch up in my games (so I don't have to attend them for a few days say) I'll move in all of them once but that takes some time. During that time one or two people will have moved again and I'll have more games waiting. But I don't have to play in those games as I have the full timeout period before my timebank will start running (3 days usually). Do you understand this fact?
This is correspondance chess, i just personally do not see the advantage in having such an addition,apart from allowing higher rated players the chance to dismiss a game he/she believes is not worth attendance.
Actually we play correspondence chess here. A subtle but important distinction. And just because you personally don't see the advantage of something doesn't mean others don't. To be honest I don't care what you do and don't see the advantage of, you've shown yourself to be utterly incapable of critical thinking. However, when you start to claim that something will give advantages to higher rated players you are past claiming something does not have worth and into claiming it is unfair. These are different, hopefully you can see this.
Also, why is using preloaded moves the same as believing a game is not worth your attendance? You have to actually attend the game to load the premoves.
A quote from an earlier post. "In a game between a 1200 and 1300 the preloaded moves won't be much use except in the opening or in occasions of forced moves. And in those cases rating doesn't matter so much as vision depth isn't really a factor."
Your words, showing that you agree that this is a proposal more useful for higher rated players, yes?
Preloaded moves can be used to greater effect by higher rated players. The premoves will be of a higher quality and the player can easier see the expected responses. But exactly the same logic applies to regular moves. Better players play better whether they are playing premoves or normal moves.
It would be easy for a high rated player to play standard openings entirely preloaded, yes? And assuming time delay, a player could leave a 3/7 game unattended for 9 days.
Assuming immediate moving, a player could be forced (not sure if that is the right word) to play three moves in a possible game winning set piece in one sitting, yes?
Firstly let's look at what a simple opening premove would have to look like for me. We are of course assuming that the system will allow for as many branches as wished which is not going to happen (even if just for the fact that it would require a lot of storage space per in progress game).
I play 1. d4 and load the premove:
If 1. ... Nf6 then 2. c4
If 1. ... d5 then 2. c4
If 1. ... f5 then 2. g3
If 1. ... e6 then 2. c4
This just covers the 4 most common responses I have seen. I've also seen moves outside of these that if I wished to cater to all possibilities I'd have to include (remember, the opponent will know I have a premove loaded and could therefore play an unusual move hoping to catch me being inatentive to the game. This would of course totally screw me if I had planned on having a 9 days away from a 3/0 game).
Now if depth was allowed then I could under each of these premoves put another set of premoves catering for different options. And at each stage there is another set of branches and I need another option set. By the 4th move we have a ridiculous amount of choice all of which need to be catered for.
Clearly setting up premoves for all responses is insane and planning on 9 days away from a 3 day timeout period and expecting to still have your timebank even moreso.
As I covered earlier say we are in a situation where the opponent only has one move and it leads to a mate in 3 in which all of his responses are forced. I see this mate and preload it (easy to do because there are no options). I send my move away and my opponent moves two days later. My first premove takes effect immediately and the game is waiting for him again. But now he has another 3 days of timeout period. My moves may be instantaneous but he still has a fresh 3 days to play his response each time.
I'm not sure if you are trying to trip me up here, but i would have to say that it was cheating, but the point is this "if you go to all that trouble to preload moves in this way, why cant you just move as normal?"
The current "play one move then wait for the other guy" system seems to work fine, i see no evidence that the status quo is a problem to game play, and you have not convinced me that it is.
Well at the current time this script would not break any site rules.
As to why play this way rather than just waiting for my opponent each time? Currently I store responses I have calculated and lines in my notebook and then I don't have to recalculate next time I come across the game (my notes will read something like "if Bxe5 Nxe5). All the script (or implementation on the site) would automate would be the actual moving of the move I know I will play. It would mean I wasn't spending my time attending to these games (even just loading the game making the move and hitting submit takes time thanks to page loads) and could instead spend time on games where I don't know what I will respond to the current position. It would also reduce site load (I'm not loading that game to play the move I know is coming).
I hope you accept that, right or wrong, i have the right to my opinion regardless of my rating. If that right hadn't been brought into question, i would've stopped posting some time ago as i believe i have already stated my case at least twice.
Actually you have no rights to state anything here given that it is a private site. But if we ignore that fact then you'll surely notice that I have exactly the same amount of right to tell you you are wrong.
18 Jun 06
3 edits
Originally posted by XanthosNZincapable of critical thinking because i dont agree with you, i'm begining to see a pattern here.
[b]But with this proposed change to the system, you are not moving once in 24 hours, you are being forced to move maybe three times in one session, with the preloaded guy not attending to his game until the "your move" sign shows up he could be away from the game for three days, which would normally be a game lost.
You actually aren't being forced t e exactly the same amount of right to tell you you are wrong.[/b]
None of what you've wrote has actually proved the status quo doesn't work, and i stand by my points.
If it aint broke, don't fix it.
edit. enter witty comeback bellow
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundNo not incapable of critical thinking because we disagree, but because you don't seem to grasp simple concepts.
incapable of critical thinking because i dont agree with you, i'm begining to see a pattern here.
None of what you've wrote has actually proved the status quo doesn't work, and i stand by my points.
If it aint broke, don't fix it.
edit. enter witty comeback bellow
And while the status quo may work why not make things better? As I said:
"All the script (or implementation on the site) would automate would be the actual moving of the move I know I will play. It would mean I wasn't spending my time attending to these games (even just loading the game making the move and hitting submit takes time thanks to page loads) and could instead spend time on games where I don't know what I will respond to the current position. It would also reduce site load (I'm not loading that game to play the move I know is coming). "
If it ain't broke don't fix it is a horrible saying that just encourages mediocrity.
Also, please learn to spell below.
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by XanthosNZi can grasp simple concepts just fine. Heres one. . .Its not all about you. Just because i dont agree with you doesn't make me wrong, nor does you having more time with your other games matter to me one iota.
No not incapable of critical thinking because we disagree, but because you don't seem to grasp simple concepts.
And while the status quo may work why not make things better? As I said:
"All the script (or implementation on the site) would automate would be the actual moving of the move I know I will play. It would mean I wasn't spending my time attendi ...[text shortened]... a horrible saying that just encourages mediocrity.
Also, please learn to spell below.
Its the people that cant think ahead three moves all the time(yes they do exist, and are needed to keep the site going as much as you), that need the time to think, not you.
18 Jun 06
1 edit
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundAnd they would have more time to think about games where they needed to calculate the next move if we allowed premoves. What's the issue?
i can grasp simple concepts just fine. Heres one. . .Its not all about you. Just because i dont agree with you doesn't make me wrong, nor does you having more time with your other games matter to me one iota.
Its the people that cant think ahead three moves all the time(yes they do exist, and are needed to keep the site going as much as you), that need the time to think, not you.
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundReduced by the same amount as if the person they were playing were to play directly after they moved you mean? They still have the base timeout period as before. They can however no longer count on always getting a few hours extra before the opponent moves.
the issue is that the time delay between moves would be reduced.
Hell, people with extremely short timebanks left in 0/x games could use it in an attempt to stay alive. I've known people playing against someone in this situation to make moves at odd times just so the opponent will timeout.
18 Jun 06
Originally posted by XanthosNZthis is another reason preloaded moves are a bad thing, thank you for bringing it up, you dismissed the point when i raised it.
Reduced by the same amount as if the person they were playing were to play directly after they moved you mean? They still have the base timeout period as before. They can however no longer count on always getting a few hours extra before the opponent moves.
Hell, people with extremely short timebanks left in 0/x games could use it in an attempt to stay ...[text shortened]... against someone in this situation to make moves at odd times just so the opponent will timeout.