[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]

[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]

[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩

Game Courier Tournament #4: An Introductory Semi-Potluck. A tournament to feature games good for introducing people to Chess variants.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 01:16 PM UTC:

It's 18 games, not 18 rounds. Some games will be played during the same round.

Vitya Makov wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 01:20 PM UTC:

18 games per all players?! Per one player 18 games probably is too long.

Sam Trenholme wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 02:49 PM UTC:

I think 18 games per player is OK, as long as they have reasonable time controls.

I also think there’s nothing wrong with having both Modern Carrera Chess and Euchess.

The important thing is to go forward with this tournament. Bickering about the games or tournament structure goes against this; if anyone doesn’t like the games, or what not, they are free to withdraw from the tournament.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 03:12 PM UTC:

I'll work out the details of the time controls later. As to the larger time frame, I plan to have three games per round, starting each new round one month after the previous round. Odd numbered rounds would feature one set of three games, and even numbered rounds would feature the other three games. That way, a new round could start even if all games in the previous round had not finished. The total tournament would be expected to last about six months.

Vitya Makov wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 04:17 PM UTC:

As Mats said: 'If it's an introductory tournament to chess variants then one should perhaps have fewer rounds. It's easier for people to sign up if it's not that time-demanding.' I agree with this.

'if anyone doesn’t like the games, or what not, they are free to withdraw from the tournament.'

I think it's not your problem.

Sam Trenholme wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 05:31 PM UTC:

OK, 18 games in 6 months. I would do this as follows:

Each participant is given a block of six games to play. The time control for the games is the same: 30 days to finish all of your moves, no grace time, no extra time. Adequate warning is given for when the games start so players don’t lose time making their first move.
In two months, all of the games will be finished. We will then have two more rounds that will be the same.
Should this site ever be down, we will make sure players are given appropriate extra time on their clocks. Fergus: It would be a very good idea to implement a universal way to have it so, should the site go down, you can report this in Game Courier (just let Game Courier know when the site went up), and all players who had the move when the site went down will be automatically given their time back, as well as having all games lost on time correctly reinstated as incomplete games. I had an unpleasant experience with Game Courier a couple of years ago because my opponent lost on time because the site went down; we were unable to correctly reinstate the game.

Does anyone have alternative proposals?

George Duke wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 06:10 PM UTC:

Eventually I hope CVPage can have one of the future tournaments in real-time to attract viewers. A one-day tournament, or just a one-day game. To show that Variants are important. Whoever's at the top, Paulowich, or Fourriere or Gifford, or Joyce one on one without off-time. Playing what? Capablanca Random Chess to attract an audience the way Capa did against Lasker. Even the present tournament should create a champion instead of just ratings and recognition.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 08:32 PM UTC:

I'm thinking of giving each player 14 days of spare time and 24 hours of grace time. Rounds with different games may overlap if players haven't yet finished some games. I also have some other ideas regarding modifications I want to make to the time controls.

When the site goes down, I account for the lost time by hardcoding it into Game Courier.

Sam Trenholme wrote on Wed, Dec 9, 2009 11:40 PM UTC:

Fergus: That sounds like a good time control, but games may last longer than two months. Consider this: a game may need 30 or even 60 moves (60 to 120 plies) to be decided; I game at 24 hours/2 weeks can very well last four months.

One thing we can do is have it so, if one side feels they have a significantly stronger position and the other side is just dragging the game out, make it feasible to adjudicate games so they don’t last for months.

My idea is 18 hours/two weeks for most games and 12 hours/two weeks for HyperModern Shatranj (since this game otherwise would have a somewhat slower pace than the other five proposed games); after two months, either side can request an adjudication.

These shorter time controls will guarantee that games will be decided within two months; allowing adjudication will guarantee we don’t have a game last six months because someone with, say, a bishop and a pawn refuses to resign against his opponent with a rook and two pawns.

I really don’t want to see this tournament last over six months.

Any other suggestions?

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 02:31 AM UTC:

To program Circular Chess, I have begun to develop support for logical directions, similar to how Zillions of Games handles directions.

Regarding time controls, I am thinking of adding options for minimum time and maximum time. After each move, anyone's time that dropped below the minimum would be raised to the minimum. This would be an alternative to using grace time. Maximum time would put a cap on the amount of time that could be accumulated with extra time or bonus time.

Nicholas Wolff wrote on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 07:03 AM UTC:

I like the idea of a 'blitz' tournament, however it sucks for a lot of us (including me) who do not live in the US or close time zones.

Sam Trenholme wrote on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 04:24 PM UTC:

You know, it might make more sense to have only 12 games with a slower time control (24 hours grace time, two weeks spare time, adjudication after three months) than to have 18 games with a relatively fast time control. A number of people have brought up that 18 games might be too much.

Nick: What do you consider a “blitz” time control?

mirari wrote on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 05:05 PM UTC:

I think excluding Gustav III's chess because it has Amazons is a very spurious reason - the Amazon is in my experience a very simple piece for chess players to learn to play with - people I've played with have had more difficulties with the Chinese cannon, for example.

Regarding time controls - how does that work with holidays, etc.?  I am traveling abroad now and then (about every second or third month), which means up to a couple of weeks with limited possibilities to keep up with games.  Also, I am away for a long time this year over Christmas and New Year - from the 16th of December up to 10th of January - if either of those would cause a trouble with the time controls for the tournament, then it is perhaps best if I withdraw before the start rather than failing to live up to my commitment and forfeiting games once the tournament is under way.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 06:17 PM UTC:

I agree that the Amazon can be easier to learn than the Cannon for players who only know Chess, but this consideration was never the basis for my decision to exclude games with Amazons. I have excluded games with Amazons for the same reason that I don't use Amazons in my own games. The Amazon is too powerful against the King. It can force checkmate against a King entirely on its own without any assistance from any other piece. In Chess, no piece can checkmate on its own. Even the Queen needs assistance from the King to checkmate the opponent's King. In any of the Capablanca variants, no piece can force checkmate on its own. Even the Archbishop, which can checkmate on its own, needs assistance to force checkmate against an opponent who is trying to avoid checkmate. In a good Chess variant, you control a team of pieces that must cooperate with each other to achieve the object of the game. But if you include Amazons in the game, cooperation between pieces is no longer as necessary, because an Amazon can win the game on its own.

Jose Carrillo wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 04:00 AM UTC:

This preset for Ajax Orthodox Chess is almost complete:
http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game%3DAjax+Orthodox+Chess%26settings%3DAlfaerie1

It enforces all the Ajax movement rules, allows the dropping of Ajax Ministers, castling, en passant, etc.

The only thing that it can't do is tell that the King is in check when attacked by the Ajax Minister.

Fergus (or anyone else), can you please help me fix this final issue?

Thanks.

M Winther wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 06:54 AM UTC:

We must assume that the players know the rules of check and checkmate. Those rules needn't be programmed. It's the piece movement rules which are important.
/Mats

je ju wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 11:52 AM UTC:

I would enjoy playing in the tournament if space is still available.

I'll propose Football Chess be included (but don't really expect it to be).

Look forward to playing again.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 12:18 PM UTC:

Mats, that's not your call.

Je ju, there is room left in the tournament for more players, just not for more games.

mirari wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 02:03 PM UTC:

My earlier question about the time control remains unanswered. Is it lenient enough to allow occasional traveling?

Fergus: 'I have excluded games with Amazons for the same reason that I don't use Amazons in my own games. The Amazon is too powerful against the King.'

Thanks for explaining, I understand this comes down to your personal taste in chess variants then, and that seems fair enough given that it is your tourney - I do wish this had been made clearer from the start though.

Myself, I enjoy a wide variety of variants, including several with pieces that would be too powerful by your definition - e.g. Chu Shogi with its Lion, Gustav III's with its Amazons and Tripunch with its whole range of insanely powerful pieces. I also disagree with your reasoning - even though one of these pieces can in theory cause chess mate on its own, I find that in practice, an unsupported attack won't succeed, because the king is defended by a team. (On the flip side, I have seen a lone queen occasionally go on a game-deciding rampage on the opponent's back rank... even though it can't deliver the actual checkmate on its own, it is powerful enough to decide the game nonetheless).

Still, I shall hope for other opportunities to play with such powerful pieces, and look forward to playing the variants that will be in the tournament.

M Winther wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 03:47 PM UTC:

But the fact that the Amazon can easier achieve mate makes it easier to handle for the amateur. To mate with B + N is another thing, it's for advanced players. The Amazon is more straightforward than the other super-knights. Isn't the Chancellor a rather clumsy piece?
/Mats

Sam Trenholme wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 06:20 PM UTC:

Amazons: I agree that these pieces don’t really work. There’s a reason why, while they tried replacing the queen with an Amazon for a while in Russia, they decided the FIDE queen was better.

Time control and number of games: There has been a lot of discussion about the the number of games, such as this posting, this posting, this posting, this posting, this posting, this posting, this posting, and this posting.

I want to see this tournament done in six months. My idea: 12 games, 24 hours per move with two weeks spare time for vacations and what not. Adjudication after two months. What do other people think? How should we guarantee that the tournament is finished up in 6 months?

M Winther wrote on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 07:07 PM UTC:Average ★★★

Sam, in Russian chess (Fide-chess with Amazon instead of queen), the single Amazon can easily get exchanged, leading to drawish play. Gustav III's Chess is totally different. Why don't you try my Zillions program? Play can be very brutally tactical in the middlegame. One can often sacrifice several pieces since the Amazon has such great mating potential. It's great fun.
/Mats

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sat, Dec 12, 2009 01:54 AM UTC:

mirari wrote:

My earlier question about the time control remains unanswered. Is it lenient enough to allow occasional traveling?

I think I'll start the tournament at the beginning of next month, so that travel over Christmas doesn't interfere with anyone starting the tournament. I plan to use time controls that will keep the pace fast enough to finish each round in a timely manner but also allow for time away. But I have not yet decided on what the time controls will be.

Jose Carrillo wrote on Sat, Dec 19, 2009 12:24 PM UTC:

The preset for Ajax Orthodox Chess is complete and enforces all the rules:
http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game%3DAjax+Orthodox+Chess%26settings%3DAlfaerie1

Thomas McElmurry wrote on Mon, Dec 21, 2009 06:42 AM UTC:

I'd like to sign up, provided the time controls are such that I can safely average 1 to 1.5 moves per game per day.  If I had been in time to suggest a game, I probably would have suggested Extinction Chess.  But the six selections look like a good set of games.

Just in case it's being seriously considered, I'll say that I'm not a fan of Sam Trenholme's proposal for adjudication of long games.  If the point of the tournament for most of us is to try out new games, it would be a shame to be deprived of an interesting endgame.

25 comments displayed

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.