mat



FICGS - Search results for mat





There are 1079 results for mat in the forum.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-08 13:45:15)
Inaugural match : Big chess

Hello to all.

The inaugural Big chess game (on the 16x16 board) restarts. As it was a bit hard to organize such a game between 2 GM, the two players finally are myself and... you :)

This is is 'priority game', just for fun. If you want to play a move just connect with the guest/guest account, if it is 'guest' turn, you can play...

http://www.ficgs.com/game_1.html

Have a good big chess game :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-08 14:49:23)
FICGS titles

As you may have read on TCCMB forum, ICCF officials reacted when they learnt about FICGS titles. My idea was it first to be informative (titles from ICCF/IECG/FIDE), because I think players like to know who they play against, particularly if their opponents are titled. It seems obvious to me that FICGS titles are FICGS ones, not "official", not ICCF or FIDE.. even if words are quite the same (titles are FICGS IM, not IM).

I would like to know what you think about that. Do you think FICGS titles should be renamed (ie. FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM), or do you think there's no possible confusion between FIDE/ICCF/IECG/FICGS titles ? This is an interesting debate I invite you to follow :

http://pub11.bravenet.com/forum/924995304/fetch/552912/

Thank you for your advices.


Per Lea    (2006-04-08 23:09:40)
Titles

A provocative question: Do we really need titles at all? Isn't rating more informative than a title that maybe has been won when the player was at the top of his playing strength, many years ago? I admit the rating system isn't perfect, but I still claim it tells me more than a title. Being a Norwegian I am possibly less obsessed with titles (within all walks of life) than people from other countries?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-10 21:51:58)
Exclamation mark

Hello Patrice, is the exclamation mark "!" okay for you ?


Patrice Verdier    (2006-04-10 22:16:07)
Exclamation mark

Yes It's OK


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-11 13:23:44)
CC players vs. Computers

Hello Marc, the idea is good for sure, but I doubt developers would want to see their "beta babies" to achieve a 2000 ELO rating with pain :) If matches like CC GM - Engines are quite balanced, so would be a CC 1800 - Engines one... Anyway, if you know developers interested, we could envisage something in this way...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-11 18:33:13)
Bug fixed...

Many improvements in the send move process... It should not be possible anymore to make a wrong move. Stalemate detection is implemented. In checkmate case, nothing else should be possible than resigning. Thanks for your feedback.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-12 14:02:49)
Solution...

One solution could be to display titles from organizations in separated columns named FICGS, ICCF, FIDE, IECG etc... (as Chessfriend do) It's quite heavy for the rating list page :/ So the idea was to display the player's highest title only, and player is free to mention his titles in his own informations page.

That's not a completely satisfying solution, I agree...


Hannes Rada    (2006-04-12 19:15:19)
Titles

>> One solution could be to display titles from organizations in separated columns named FICGS, ICCF, FIDE, IECG etc... (as Chessfriend do) It's quite heavy for the rating list page :/ So the idea was to display the player's highest title only, and player is free to mention his titles in his own informations page.

I think that's the best idea. Maybe you can use smaller fonts, so that all information can be displayed on that page.


Håkon Anda    (2006-04-14 16:52:42)
Some wishes

I think this server works great after so short time online. However I think there are som possible improvements that could be done: 1. Option that can disable e-mail notification of one own moves. 2. It should be possible to take leave. 3. A better list of our own games, like when last move was done, reflection time left and so on. 4. A flag for every player that shows the nationality and other information that could be found in the rating list. Best regards, Håkon Anda


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-14 17:08:26)
Answers...

Hello Håkon. Some answers :

1. Maybe try : Preferences -> Notification checkbox
2. Right, other players already asked for this. Now you have 2 months to play a single move, so few chances to be late. The council will discuss about vacation option before to be implemented.
3. Some players asked these informations not to appear in the list to reduce it in size, so you can check this just by clicking on the games. ("when last move was done" : right !)
4. For website design reasons, I can't display many informations on the same page. I don't think flags are essential, but it will probably be implemented anyway !


Glen D. Shields    (2006-04-15 19:01:14)
Extend Timeout

I agree great server. The board definiely would be better with coordinates. Is there a way to extend the timeout time? Or an option to save one's login information so you don't have to input name and password after being tossed? Thanks!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-16 16:02:22)
Right again

You'll have both options very soon.

In case of crash, the database is automatically & periodically saved out of the server.


Henri Muller    (2006-04-16 18:14:39)
some whiches/qqs souhaits.

Pourquoi pas songer aussi à des matches entre DEUX joueurs ?? ( nombre de parties au choix et à déterminer au début !?)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-16 18:42:59)
Two players matches

Question about 2 players matches will be discussed too. I first decided not to offer these formulas because it may lead to cheating problems, at least unfair results. I have implemented processes to detect cheaters, but avoiding temptations is probably best for all :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-17 09:23:44)
Fraudulent ?

I'm not sure.. is really an "automatic player" fraudulent ? Many players are centaurs (human + computer). The decision to let an engine play would be a human one after all.. Anyway, a script player doesn't seem so easy to make. (and for what ?)


Glen D. Shields    (2006-04-17 19:01:10)
Thanks for the Comments Guys

Dinesh - since computer use is allowed I have no problem if someone uses a "script" to automate moves. I don't think that would be fradulent. Actually I think it would be clever :) The point I was trying to ask is anyone concerned (besides me) that we created a chess medium (server chess) where it's so easy to make moves that the games move too fast? I dread the start of a new section, particularly large sections with 10+ players. It's impossible to keep one's inbox empty for even a minute. I know I should show more discipline and walk away, but it's almost like an illness "just one more move then I'll stop" and I don't! One practice I've been using lately is to make a move in a notebook and sit on the move for a day or two before sending it. That helps slow things down. I wonder if a delay send option on the server would make any sense? One could make a move and then click a delay send button for 24 or 48 hours. One would be charged time during the delay, but it would automate the slow down and make tournament startups a little less hectic. Maybe I'm the only one who sees this as an issue> If so, then label this just one crazy man's thoughts :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-17 19:25:06)
New features...

Coordinates & last move have been implemented... Now the "live games" concept of the site extends to the home page :)

Also, player informations are 5 successive pages (informations, elo history, title norms, tournaments, games), reachable just by clicking on "ELO" (to improve yet) after clicking the magnifying glass.


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-04-20 14:52:47)
search by ECO code

Wonderful feature to have all on-going games available just one click away (an old request to Reimund @chessfriend). Even more interesting to be able to search games by player name. Now would it be too much to ask for a search by ECO? --similar games would be identified in a second, a good thing; and information for choosing different variations would be available..


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-23 06:01:44)
explanation

Hello Elmer.

It's possible the player entered an ambiguous move in plain text format. The program may have interpreted this move as the first one possible. Anyway he probably did not verify his move before confirmed (inquiring), I can't correct that. I'll fix that as soon as the next update of the site is done. Thank you.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-23 06:12:25)
Not yet

Conditional moves will be probably implemented, but not this week... Many things to do before.

I think it's generally an appreciated feature. Some players don't like to receive "automatic" moves just after they played, but it seems to be a "must" have for CC servers.


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-04-23 11:56:55)
not PGN

Maybe bringing the text-entry move facility closer to the board might be a quick fix (for the player checking the validity of intended move).

Regarding the format of the on-going games, it appears the player's move is copied "as is" directly to the game score (I have just entered "e7-e5", accepted by the interface as "e5", but it was copied as "1...e7-e5" into the PGN score of the on-going game), regards


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-23 12:33:40)
Checkmate / Stalemate

Note : Checkmate and stalemate are not automatically converted as a win or draw, your opponent has to resign or accept draw before.. I thought it was a more friendy way, and you have the possibility to send a last message with your move.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-23 13:48:27)
French websites

Quelques liens de sites français tout d'abord :

http://www.france-echecs.com
(le forum français bien connu)

http://echecsmag.over-blog.com
(un nouveau magazine sans lange de bois)

http://www.asso-ecam.com
(les échecs par correspondance sans assistance informatique)


Michael Höppenstein    (2006-04-24 06:42:14)
Michael Höppenstein

What will happen, if my opponent won't resign after a checkmate?


Michael Höppenstein    (2006-04-24 15:45:19)
Referee - Checkmate

That's not quite all right, I think. In case a game is won by checkmate, the game should be over - that is: without referee and without me waiting for my opponent losing on time. Would you consider changing this? Just a suggestions.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-24 15:59:32)
Checkmate

I considered that there wasn't so much difference : Generally players resign before being checkmated. Whoever playing until checkmate "quickly" will probably resign quickly... A player who wants to last a game will do it before checkmate... I really think it's only more friendly (and original).

Anyway, if too much players or council think otherwise, I'll change it. Thanks for your feedback.

About checkmate, I just fixed a bug that prevented players to resign if they were checkmated. (hum :)) That's why 2 players called the referee.


Stefano Ghisi    (2006-04-24 16:18:59)
Quad tourn

Do you think it's possible in future to have quad tournaments? (4 players 6 match each one)


Michael Höppenstein    (2006-04-24 18:13:20)
Checkmate

I think I was one of those payers. I won the game a few days ago but my opponent has not as yet resigned the game.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-24 18:43:59)
It was precisely one...

... of these two games ! The player wanted to resign but he couldn't "because" he was checkmated. The bug has been fixed today.


Michael Höppenstein    (2006-04-25 17:15:18)
Opponent does not resign after checkmate

The bug might be fixed but my opponent won't resign. Do I really have to wait 48 days - I've just checked - till he forfeits on time? How do I make him resign?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-25 23:23:09)
Forums

Here are some forums where I announced FICGS. Most of them are well known & good places :

http://pub11.bravenet.com/forum/924995304
TCCMB

http://www.quebecechecs.com
Quebec Echecs

http://www.talkchess.com
Talk Chess

http://www.chessninja.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi
Chess Ninja

http://chessexchange.com/
Chess Exchange


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-26 16:07:15)
Special tournaments

Hello Daniel. Chess 960 & Thematic tournaments (actual is king's gambit) are in category :

Ficgs__Chess__Special__Tournaments


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-04 17:25:27)
FICGS statistics

2006 may 4

Dear chessfriends, the first FICGS statistics (1 month after server start) are displayed on the informations page : http://www.ficgs.com/informations.html

Google just reacted (today), so I hope for new players coming from search engines soon...


Jose Carrillo    (2006-05-05 00:34:33)
Re: Update - Chess 960

Excellent news! How do I set up a one game match against somebody?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-05 15:19:03)
FICGS world championship

Hello to all.

Please post here all your questions / suggestions about the FICGS world championship rules.

There are many answers to bring yet : about the building of groups, who exactly will play which stage, etc...

It seems that many players like this scheme : knockout / round-robin tournament, that is more fair and much more interesting than a pure round-robin cycle. The final match rules are particularly hard (24 games, 30 days + 1 day / move), but I think it's a good way to make it different and give value to the title. Rules are not far from the old classical world championship, the champion will only play the next final match against the challenger...

FICGS WCH Rules :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#tournament


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-05 15:36:17)
2 players matches

Hello Jose ! That is not possible yet. There's no players enough to create other tournament categories.. The delay before tournament start could increase significantly.


Jose Carrillo    (2006-05-05 18:37:09)
Re: 2 players matches

Don't we need only 2 players for a two-game match? Why do we need to create a whole tournament? I'm only interested in playing one other player. Are all the games in FICGS tournament based? Are there no individual matches?


Konstantin Konuhov    (2006-05-07 21:25:15)
Mate

Game 255. Help. Game is check and mate, but it is no end. What to do with it?


Trent Parker    (2006-05-08 01:19:43)
re: Mate

Hello Konstantin! your opponent has to resign. Hey Thibault. Could i suggest that you send a message to everyone in regards to this issue? I suspect that quite a lot of people do not read these forums regularly. Just a thought. Cheers, Trent Parker


Jose Carrillo    (2006-05-11 00:09:47)
Re: Qualifying

The top 4 players in the round robin qualify for the quarterfinals.

The beauty of this system is that the #1 and #2 players in the round robin have a 50% chance of going to the final (they deserve it too! as they finished top 2 in the round robin).

The loser of the 1st-2nd match still has a chance to go to the finals if he wins the semi-finals.

This system prevents lower ranked 3rd and 4th players in the round robin to knock out in one round the top players of the round robin.

If you play the round robin to win (and finish 1st or 2nd) you are rewarded for the finals.

There is still the possibility of the 1st and 2nd place in the round robin to play in the final match.

If you just play to finish 3rd or 4th, you have to fight your way to the final.

There will never be a 3rd vs 4th final match, something very well possible in a knock out tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-12 07:39:04)
Re: Qualifying + Banned players

Hello Jose. You said : "There is still the possibility of the 1st and 2nd place in the round robin to play in the final match."

Actually this is the case, 1st and 2nd qualify for the next stage. How your system works for a 3 stages round-robin tournament cycle ? We can't add 2 extra-stages to designate who qualify from each round-robin tournament...


Hello Trent. There are 3 players who unregistered (not banned), they still appear in the WCH waiting list but they will be automatically removed when building groups.


Jose Carrillo    (2006-05-13 00:28:45)
Re: Qualifying

In a Knock out you can have 3rd vs 4th in the final. In the Page system you can't.

It's just a matter of whether you want to acknowledge the top players in the round robin.

In the page system ONLY the top four players in the round robin qualify for the playoffs.

Look at the Page system in practice in the Gligoric Cup tournament that we are running in FRCEC at:

http://frcec.chess960.info/GligoricCup.htm


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-05-14 00:47:20)
Swiss

Hello Thibault these are the "rules" (see at http://www.chessfriend.com/ and then Tournaments-CFC World-Championship-CFC Championship 2003)
Modus: 3 rounds Swiss à 10 games each. ... Every player is allowed to participate in all 3 rounds. Pairings of the 1st round are based on rating. We will build equal groups where possible. In the second round we will do the pairings so that be build at first 3 groups depending on score and rating. Among this three groups we will build new tournaments which should be of about equal rating.. Third round will be paired in the same way with the exception that the first group will be the strongest (score and rating). Normally two players should play during a championship cycle only one game. If it will be necessary in a following round that two players play a second game, this game should be played with revised colours.
I will send you more information.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-14 16:07:16)
"Blitz" cup...

Thank you Heinz Georg, for the files you sent to me.

Now I understand better the work and ideas of Reimund Lutzenberger in Chessfriend.com, a great experimentation field for sure...

I first concluded some things not to do in FICGS WCH. In example, a player rated 2500 (even provisional rating from fide) shouldn't have to play in the first stage against a low-rated player in a world championship [but that could be possible in a cup tournament cycle]. So I'll add special rules for high rated players (who are not qualified for the WCH knockout tournament) to begin directly in a 2nd stage tournament...

I agree with Dinesh, the aim is not to use the same formulas, even good ones. Anyway I think we can find new interesting (better :)) ones. But as the WCH is already a rapid tournament cycle, the CUP could be an unrated "blitz" (30 days per game with no increment, or even 10 days + 1 hour / move) knockout (2 games / match + playoffs) !! Something quite "brutal" and unfair between correspondence chess & classical rythms. What do you think ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-15 08:33:32)
Team Championship

In brief : The idea of a team championship is very good, but of course it's too early... Such a championship could be a 2 stages round-robin tournament with teams of 6 or 7 players.


Bonjour Sébastien. Pourquoi discorde ? :) Au contraire...

Pour le moment j'envisageais des matchs par équipe occasionnels (FICGS vs. fédération ou autre serveur de jeu).

Le problème d'un championnat est qu'il soit représentatif, il serait donc souhaitable (dans le cas par pays) de pouvoir monter des équipes complètes (6 ou 7 joueurs) et que les plus forts joueurs trouvent un "intérêt" à défendre leurs couleurs (dépend de la popularité du serveur). L'idée est de toutes manières des plus intéressantes, mais le serveur doit gagner en confiance et en expérience sur la durée, il est encore tôt. Par contre je me demande comment se déroulerait un tel championnat... Un tournoi toutes ronde (round-robin) entre 5 à 9 pays, divisés par groupes, puis une phase finale ?!


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-05-17 08:41:06)
overall evaluation of this new site

This mate problem on this site is a big problem. Only chess site I play on where you have won and it is not won until the player resigns. Secondly I am in a game where mate is in 2. but my opponent has stopped playing. Many others are reporting the same thing. The idea is nice, it assumes that all players are good sports. Over all I would say many players here are not considerate of their opponents, and it is a reflection of their charachter. I dont think to much of the moderaters or those who are responsible and have taken a no action stance despite many complaints. Moderator or responsible authority take care of this ridiculous policy Regards Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-17 13:53:11)
ref : Wayne

You pointed out the problem : Actually, the situation is the same if there's is mate in 2 or mate already... or mate in 15...

Anyway, the "call refere" should have been reachable when it's not your turn. I'll tell here when it's fixed.

Thanks for feedback !


Glen D. Shields    (2006-05-18 00:53:27)
Mate Problem Should be Fixed

Thibault - Since I am never at a loss to voice an opinion , I'll go ahead and voice one here :)


I don't know how much work it is for you to fix the mate problem, but I think it should be fixed. I admit in the 1000+ correspondence games I've played through the years very few games actually get to the checkmate move. When they do, the game should be over. There is no reason one should have to beg his opponent to resign or beg the referee to do something. That doesn't make any sense. Is it a HUGE problem to fix this? I'm perplexed.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-18 03:18:57)
Let's see...

Hello Glen.

This is quite unusual and it may look strange at the first sight, but I still think that this rule is positive and is not a nonsense !

That's true I prefer the server working this way, and it saves time process, but I keep in mind : First, this is friendly... 2nd, if a player want to last a game, he will do it before being checkmated. 3rd, I didn't adjudicate Wayne's game, and his opponent just resigned only 2 days after his move. Let's give a chance to this rule, I'm convinced time will show that it is not a nonsense ;)


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-05-19 00:50:31)
It is not nonsense

He resigned i believe cause of opinion of those here. It is not nonsence. The fact that this site is correspondence has nothing to do with it. absolutley nothing ! You go to any club tournament and you will not be welcome back with such over the board conduct. It is rude, spitefull and counter productive to good chess and fair play. You will change this rule my friend. There is NO justification for a player to drag out a forced mate loss if he sees it. and believe me in the case of my game 205 you must admit it is obvious. In fact he should have resigned many moves earlier, I would have 4 sure. do not like your weak argument justifying the mate implementation.... Here is to a nice cite for corresponse chess. Respexctfully Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-19 02:15:13)
Amici sumus

Hello Wayne. I agree, of course, your game was won. Here the problem is not the checkmate rule, it is about the adjudication of a forced win or draw ! Clearly, there's no perfect solution. There will be some abuses, more or less important ! One can't prevent this... Rules (particularly time rules) mean abuses. But don't forget that if a player abuses, it doesn't mean all players do the same intentionally in such a situation. I don't know if your opponent really stopped to play... (what for ? .. you'll get the point anyway) Maybe he just had other things to do these days... Who knows ? Even if this is not the case, it could have been ! It is the same problem (in the forced mate case) everywhere, there's simply nothing else to do than wait, then call referee when a time limit is reached. There's no other reasonable rule ! (and it would be too much work for referees)

Understand me, I don't say it was not an abuse, I just say there's no solution. If I change the rule, there will be abuses in another way ! There will be abuses anyway... Nevertheless, if you have an idea, I'll read it with interest.

Respectfully.


Glen D. Shields    (2006-05-19 03:40:33)
I See Two Issues

Perhaps I miss something, but I see two separate issues here. One issue is technical, the other is chess etiquette.

The inability of the server to recognize that a game is over when one player is checkmated is a technical issue that should be fixed (in my opinion). No resignation should be necessary to end the game.

The chess etiquette issue is different. I agree it is rude for a player to drag out an obviously lost game. Despite the bad behavior, I think it is the individual's right to continue to fight to the bitter end. We might not like it, but that's just part of the game. I never played in any correspondence or over-the-board club where a player's decision to resign was determined by his opponent or the referee.


Trent Parker    (2006-05-19 08:04:48)
My Overall evaluation of this new site

I really like this site. I like the format of the tournaments, I like the fact that the number of games one can play are not limited.

I like the idea of the best game function, however i do not think it is properly utilised (I have aired my ideas on this elsewhere....)

I personally think the resign for checkmate rule is ok, although none of my games have gotten that far yet. After all a) this does not limit the amount of games that you can play on this site and b) your opponent will run out of time anyhow. So what is the difference? You are going to get the point anyhow.
I have the following criticisms:
I am on Dial up. This site is very slow to play on, very time consuming with the amount of games that i am up to. would it be possible to... I dunno... make it like a javascript or something, just to speed it up a bit. Or perhaps even make the submit button further up the page a bit? Often i have gone out of a game thinking that i have made the move when i have forgotten to click the submit button. (By the way this site would be excellent if i had broadband but i don't.)

I may have some more comments later on but at the moment i've said enough.

Thanks for this site Thibault!

Trent Parker


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-05-19 08:05:25)
suggestion

I see your points. I play at another corresponce sight, Pacific-mall.com/chess. They have solved the problem there and incidentally it will satisfy those who have mentioned the desirability to chat with your opponent during the game. At pac-mall you can chat about the game or any subject, others can view the game and drop by to say hello, or what ever. Outsiders do not suggest moves but are allowed to talk about a particuliar line after the fact, but in ten years there I have not seen this done only in rare circumstances. In the talk window you can politely tell your oppent "it is mate come up. giving the forced line" or you can just say "Dan the game is lost for you, give your reason. All accept this decorum there. and it is the friendliest cite on the web. The players there range from novices to close to 2300 which I am. By the way, my name there is globalpac, look me up on the ladders (2). Do me a favor and check it out. Tell me what you think. Thank you With respect.... Wayne


Mircea Hrubaru    (2006-05-21 18:16:00)
Adjudication?

Why wasn't game 201 ended in mate?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-22 07:35:15)
Checkmate / Stalemate...

Hello Mircea.

Please read the F.A.Q. in Help :
http://www.ficgs.com/help.html

You may read this discussion too :
http://www.ficgs.com/forum_read_302.html


Henri Muller    (2006-05-23 09:43:09)
Time reflexion !!

Je rejoins en partie la note de Wayne Lowrance. Il y a quelque chose d'incorrect dans le décompte du temps de réflexion. Il suffit de jouer les 10 premiers coups très rapidement, et on dispose ensuite de 60 jours de réflexion !!! Ainsi, un joueur, sur le point d'être maté, peut attendre DEUX mois avant de répondre !? Et certaines parties traînent ainsi lamentablement....par manque de fair-play de l'adversaire. Aberrant ! Pourquoi pas limiter une réponse à 5 ou 7 jours de réflexion MAXIMUM - tout en conservant le décompte habituel. Il FAUT donc répondre endéans les 5 ou 7 jours ( ou perdre la partie ). Cette pratique est courante partout !!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-26 21:19:33)
transpositions...

Hello David. Thanks for your feedback !

That's a big deal. Actually I have a solution to automate transpositions management. But it could bring other problems... In example, a secondary (or totally wrong) line should always transpose to the main line..

Your example (f4 e5 e4) is true, so we should give our opinion about the position (and future moves), not the last move...

About the search function, you're right again, but this point is even more complex ! I'll think about it later, I must care about time processing. Anyway, you can use Chessbase or Chess Assistant to find games sorted by position. So, by now, the search function works for openings, not positions.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-28 14:06:07)
Go games - SGF format / Java viewer

Hello to all.

Go games can be replayed with the Java viewer. Click on the magnifying glass near Game #

SGF format is available for your games (see help), ie. :

http://www.ficgs.com/format_viewer_sgf.php?game=805


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-05-29 13:51:27)
Remaining time

Hello Thibault!

What a pity! Everything I would like is a short overview of my running games - with the remaining time(s). I don't need the start date of the tournament at this page. You can delete it to get more space. My messages doesn't contain further information which I need.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-29 22:57:28)
Bobby Fischer vs. Boris Spassky

Hello Steven.

That's great ! Where did you find such information ? Do you know the name of the film ? (Bobby & Boris ? :))

Thanks.


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-05-29 23:44:30)
Value of the pieces...

A bishop against two pawns - never if it is not mate. You have two open lines and I lack an important piece.


Michael Aigner    (2006-06-01 20:48:46)
FICGS reminder

I have a lot of time left in all off my games and got the following reminser mail.

Did anyone get the same strange mail?

This is a reminder.

You did not connect to FICGS for 13275 days. You may have running games that will be lost on time. If you don't want to receive any reminder, you can turn off the notification options in preferences. There will be no more than 3 consecutive reminders. This email was generated automatically by http://www.ficgs.com/


Lionel Vidal    (2006-06-01 22:17:30)
Go rules

I don't quite understand what kind of problems with draws remains with FICGS (sic!) rules: as passing is not allowed, if you add the non repetition of the same whole board position and a non integer komi, I do not see how a draw is still possible.

BUT... this solution does actually not solve anything as I don't think you can forbid passing (as a matter of fact, I checked the official japanese, chinese, new-zealand, AGA (USA) and SST rules: pass is allowed and needed)
The main reason is, IMO, that you need a legal way to end the game (double pass). And yes there are situations where the best move for BOTH players is NOT to move at all in the area: the simplest case I can think of is thousand-year kos, which in the case of japanese rule usually end in seki.
Note that a single pass (that is the game goes on after it) can change the difference in scores in area mode: the AGA rule introduces the concept of pass stone to compensate and insists on white making the last move (if necessary with an additional pass and pass stone) to ensure that the total number of stones played by the two players are equal!
(BTW this is one of the reasons, admitedly far behind familiarity, why I prefer the japanese rule in face to face go)

To sum things up (!!), while I agree that FICGS could develop its own set of rules, I feel that the subject is too complex and error-prone, and has been long, and still is, disputed by highly competent authorities : why not use the result of their work?
I would add that the point of all this is rather moot if you consider that situation like triple ko and alii are indeed rather rare: why not stricly stick to, say, the official chinese rule, and replay the game by referee decision in the rare cases where neither playing side will yield?

oh, but I could also check what they do in the kiseido server ?!?
oh, and do take what I say with great caution: I don't feel and I am certainly not competent enough on the subject! Any other advice over there? :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-01 21:25:04)
Discrepancies

It is very clear Lionel.

In another hand, each tournament rules and generally each situation influence the strategy at chess (so other games). And FICGS chess wch rules are special ones in the knockout tournament that should avoid draws. Actually, only a "one game match" can have no influence on 'the game'. (not perfectly true, as the player's strength is another factor)

Rules are flexible, particularly for the game of Go, so I think we can use even uncommom ones, if it is balanced enough (= there's still a challenge). Do you have an idea about this rule avoiding repetition, how many stones or komi it could be worth ?

Another question : Are there situations that look like zugzwang in Go (where the best move could be 'passing') ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-02 17:48:34)
Go rules

Hello Lionel. I just read the 1988 version of the official rules of the Chinese Weiqi Association.

The point here is to play with the most interesting & fair rules, not 'official' ones or others if it could be improved...

Note that FICGS chess rules have a peculiarity : 50 moves rules isn't applied if the mate can be forced. FICGS chess world championship rules are not (of course) the rules used by FIDE. I spent much time thinking about rules which are IMO the best thing in this server and I think most players will appreciate these points.

I think avoiding draws in Go is interesting because energy consuming could be too different in some games and lead to unfair situations in tournaments.

Hash keys don't solve all problems, 'superko' situations could remain as draw, furthermore these special rules could avoid any ambiguity. It is clear, it brokes 'symmetry' and I feel it is fair enough.

Then, rules exist to be enforced ! :) .. More seriously, I'm not convinced these new rules don't make sense, even if it needs adjustments. Still inquiring, but unless I find (or you convince me :)) a solid argument in another way, I think I'll apply them.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-03 07:03:45)
Download chess games

Hello Karlheinz.

Ok, I'll make something today to download directly all finished chess games in PGN format ! Sorry, not much time before and I had to think about it a little, so that it uses as less resources as possible.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-03 19:22:18)
Download games + RSS feed

Hello Karlheinz.

It's now possible to "directly" download games in PGN format. Please try the 'download' link on the viewer page for any game, or try ie. this one - http://www.ficgs.com/game_136.pgn

I've also added links to RSS feeds for games in the viewer page, and for the forum.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-09 14:34:14)
Email webmaster, 2 players matches

Bonjour Julien, merci :)

My email is displayed (just replace the symbol by @) on the 'About' page.

As I explained in another (old) thread, priorities are to reduce the delay for tournaments to start and to make it as simple as possible. As this server offers all games live, I think it to be 'competition oriented' is the best choice. It would be easy to offer many sorts of tournaments, rated/unrated, different time controls, quad/round-robin/ko etc... but it would loose his interest.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-10 10:52:11)
Team championship

Très exactement 3... (en me comptant :)) C'était prématuré de toutes manières, et il faudrait que je réfléchisse à une autre approche. Cela dit, je ne suis effectivement pas certain de la nécessité d'une telle compétition, les échecs par correspondance s'y prêtant sans doute moins. A suivre...


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-13 11:35:10)
help (2 players matches)

i would like to know if it is possible to challenge an individual for a game. ie. I would like to play vs Nigel Davis but dont know how to challenge him.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-13 11:58:41)
2 players matches

Hello Amir.

Sorry, this is not possible yet to invite players for a 2-games match.

Nevertheless, you can start a game with Nigel instantly just entering the FICGS CHESS CLASS M 000005 tournament waiting list. One player more, and the tournament will start !

Another way, as it would be an interesting match for sure, I can create a special match if Nigel agrees to play.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-14 08:12:37)
FICGS 1st chess world championship

That's right.

However, it's more like an extra championship, it doesn't change anything for players rated under 2300, ie. a player rated 1700 who register next year couldn't play the 2nd FICGS chess championship since 2nd stage begin... But he could register for the 3rd wch.

The positive points are everyone can play immediately and 2nd wch could be a complete cycle (with a final match)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-15 16:36:17)
Criteria

Hello Dorel and Daniel.

As you noticed, rating is quite important in FICGS world championship cycle (particularly established ratings, obtained from IECG / ICCF or after 9 games finished in FICGS) !

I think these rules are really the best choice in order to designate a world champion. It's more logical IMO to favour players who obtained previously the best results in FICGS and recognized organizations, and consequently a high rating. It takes time, of course. Even very strong players starting with a 1700 rating won't achieve a 2300 established rating before months !

Criterias in FICGS wch are (from most important to least) :

1) Winner of the previous cycle (qualify for the final match)
2) The eight best established ratings (play the KO tournament)
3) Points obtained in the wch tournaments
4) The tournament entry rating (TER)


Of course, there are some provisional ratings that will increase a lot, but it is not possible to grant a 2300 rating to any player saying so. It's already a lot of time gained that ratings from FIDE, ICCF, IECG be recognized.

Finally it is the same in IECG / ICCF : it's very hard to achieve a high rating, it's very hard to directly qualify for a 2nd stage too, it takes months, probably years in email chess...

Now, please consider this, if we start 1st wch at stage 1 : It won't change anything for your play, as the 1st stage of the 2nd wch is exactly the same... 2300+ players won't play before months... and if the rule is changed about 2300 mark and everyone playing 1st stage, probably all games for 2300+ players won't be rated with a 100% result... and at last it will be harder for you to qualify for 2nd stage...

It is a hard work to write rules as fair, balanced and interesting as possible. Rules can't satisfy everyone, sorry about that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-15 17:51:02)
Candidate and World champion...

That's right, Daniel... In another hand, the 1st wch wouldn't be complete without a final match.

Here is a suggestion : What I called 1st wch wouldn't be named 1st wch, it would be only a cycle that will designate the 1st candidate for the 1st wch title and final match... The other one will be the winner of the 1st wch cycle. And both will play the first final match for the 1st wch title. Thus everyone can play immediately, and you play in the 1st world championship.

I think it could satisfy everybody.. !? What do you think ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-16 13:46:10)
Right...

Hello Heinz-Georg.

Thanks for help :) Indeed, I've forgotten the parameter for provisional ratings (that evolve quicker than established ratings)... I'll change these points within hours. (right, 95 to 99 values in the bonus table are useless, but it is informative about the formula)


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-19 14:53:39)
1. d4

The move 1.d4 offers the same benefits to development and center control as does 1.e4, but unlike with the King Pawn openings where the e4 pawn is undefended after the first move, the d4 pawn is protected by White's queen. This slight difference has a tremendous effect on the opening. For instance, whereas the King's Gambit is rarely played today at the highest levels of chess, the Queen's Gambit remains a popular weapon at all levels of play. Also, compared with the King Pawn openings, transpositions between variations are more common and critical in the closed games. White develops aiming for a particular formation without great concern over how Black chooses to defend. Both these systems are popular with club players because they are easy to learn, but are rarely used by professionals because a well prepared opponent playing Black can equalize fairly easily.


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-19 15:10:14)
thibault

je viens de recevoir un email de Nigel consentant a un match. je lui ai offert un match comportant 3 parties. je pense qu il sera d accord avec ce format. peux tu arranger ca? j'ai aussi repondu a ton email


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-19 16:34:56)
GM special match

Hello to all.

From time to time, special events will take place on FICGS.

A 4-games match just started between GM Nigel Davies (GBR) and GM Amir Bagheri (FRA).

http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__MATCH_EVENT__000001.html

I think we'll watch these games with interest :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-19 18:42:16)
FICGS 1st world championship

Hello Heinz-Georg.

While watching the wch waiting list, I realized that there could be an improvement more about this "extra-group". So here is the 1st wch scheme (and next ones, without the special group in the first stage), according to the rules.

Stage 1 :

-- Knockout tournament --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_1__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_2__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_3__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_4__000001

with John Anderson, Petr Makovsky, Daniel Cinca and 5 other players...

-- Round-robin tournaments --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_1__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_2__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_3__000001
(...)

And at last, a special and one-time group :

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_M__000001

This will be a high rated group, with GM Nigel Davies, GM Amir Bagheri and the ~10 players 2300+ who won't play the knockout tournament according to the rules. The winner of this group will directly qualify for stage 3 round-robin final tournament (a one-time rule). The others can play stage 2 as specified in the rules.

Thus, only the 1st wch will start on july 1st. I think it's fair enough and finally everyone can play...


Stage 2 :

-- Knockout tournament --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_SEMI_FINAL_1__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_SEMI_FINAL_2__000001

-- Round-robin tournaments --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_1__000001
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_2__000001
(...)


Stage 3 :

-- Knockout tournament --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_KNOCKOUT_FINAL__000001

-- Round-robin tournament --

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_ROUND_ROBIN_FINAL__000001


Stage 4 :

-- Candidates match --

FICGS__CHESS__CANDIDATES_FINAL__000001


Stage 5 :

-- Title match --

FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000001

... if there's a world champion and if he defends his title. Consequently we won't have a stage 5 this time, but as it could happen again in the future...

That's all folks !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-20 17:17:19)
Re: "Revolver" movie...... cinema UFO !

Yes :) ... I saw it in french version... It was really IMO one of the biggest deceptions of the year... probably because I expected a lot, when seeing this fantastic trailer.

This film should have been one of the greatest chess (games in general) relative movies. There was all matters, and many interesting philosophical thoughts... maybe not supported enough by the movie. And I suspect director Guy Ritchie of having voluntarily suicided the movie during the shooting... Luc Besson or other reasons... How to explain such fantastic pictures, then such obvious faults all long. The screenplay surely was better than the result.

Finally, cinema press judged it as totally pretentious and it was a commercial failure. That's a pity, really.


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-22 15:47:42)
Interesting question for the Gambit's a

Gambits are the schizophrenics of the chess openings. Most players love to play through a finished game that starts as a gambit, but few players dare to play gambits themselves. Gambits lead to attacking games that avoid the calculated buildup preceding a classic attack. Can the gambiteer justify the material disadvantage? Can the opponent overcome the positional disadvantage that comes with grabbing the gambit sacrifice?


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-23 12:25:36)
Blindfolded Chess

THE chess-world (for there is a "world" in chess as in other matters) has lately been startled by a very extraordinary performance at one of the "divans" of the metropolis. A young American has played ten games at once, against an equal number of players, without, on his part, obtaining a single glimpse at any one of the chess-boards. The feat is not new; but never before was it performed so triumphantly as in the present day. The writers who have ferreted out the early history of this beautiful game have found the name of one Tchelebi, who, nearly nine centuries ago, was able to play at chess without seeing the board. Many persons in the East acquired the art of playing by feeling instead of seeing pieces; but that is a very different affair, since in such a case the sense of touch comes in aid of the memory. In 1266, a Saragen, named Buzecca, came to Florence and at the Palazzo del Popolo played three games at once, looking at one board, but not at the other two. He won two of the games, and made a drawn or abandoned game of the other. As all his competitors were skilful players, his achievement caused irrepressible astonishment. At various times, in later centuries, this mode of play was exhibited by different persons--Ruy Lopez, the author of one of the earliest treatises on chess; Mangiolini of Florence, Zerone, Medrano, Leonardo da Cutri, Paolo Boi, Salvio, and others, many of whom were Spaniards. Boi is reputed to have played three games at once without seeing the board. Damiano, an Italian, who wrote a treatise on chess more than three centuries and a half ago, gave what he called the "Rules" for learning to play without seeing the board; but his rules are worth very little, amounting chiefly to a recommendation to cultivate the memory. Keysler, in his Account of Turin (1749), says: "The late Father Sacchieri, Lecturer on Mathematics at Pavia, was a remarkable instance of the strength of the human understanding, particularly that faculty of the soul we term memory. He could play at chess with three different persons at the same time, even without seeing any one of the three chess-boards. He required no more than that his substitute should tell him what piece his antagonist had moved, and Sacchieri could direct what step was to be taken on his side, holding, at the same time, conversation with the company present. If any dispute arose about the place where any piece should be, he could tell every move that had been made, not only by himself, but by his antagonist, from the beginning of the game, and in this manner incontestably decided the proper place of the piece. This uncommon dexterity at the game of chess appears to me almost the greatest instance that can be produced of a surprising memory." The most celebrated player of the last century, however, in this peculiar achievement, was the Frenchman Andre Danican, who then, and afterwards, was generally known by the name of Philidor. In 1743, when Philidor was about eighteen years old, M. de Legalle asked him whether he had ever tried to play from memory, without seeing the board. The youth replied, that as had calculated moves, and even whole games, at night in bed, he thought he could do it. He immediately played a game with the Abbe Chenard, which he won without seeing the board. After that, a little practice enabled him to play nearly as well in this as in the ordinary fashion--sometimes two games at once. The French Cyclopedie told of a particular game in which a false move was purposely made by his antagonist; Philidor discovered it after many moves, and replaced the pieces in their proper position. Forty years afterwards, he was residing in England, where he astonished English players by his blindfold achievements at a chess-club in St. James' Street. He played three games at once, with Count Bruhl, Mr. Bowdler, and Mr. Maseres, the first two of whom were reputed the best players at that time in England. Philidor won two of the games, and drew the third, all within two hours. On another occasion, in the same year (1788), he played three games at once, blindfold as before, and giving the odds of pawn and move to one of his antagonists; again did he win two of the games, and draw the third. His demeanor during these labors surprised his visitors as much as his skill, for he kept up a lively conversation during his games. Many eminent chess-players, including M'Donnell, La Bourdonnaye, Staunton, etc., have achieved these blindfold wonders, in greater or less degree, since the days of Philidor. M'Donnell, a famous player about thirty years ago, played his moves even more rapidly without than with the board; he did not object to any amount of conversation in the room during his play, but disliked whispers. La Bourdonnaye could play within a shade of his full strength without seeing the board; he won against good players, on some occasions two at a time; but when trying the threefold labor, his brain nearly gave way, and he wisely abandoned all such modes of playing his favorite game. Mr. Staunton, the leading English player at present (but who has almost ceased to play since he undertook the editing of an edition of Shakespeare), some years ago played many blindfold games with Harrwitz and Kieseritzky, foreign players of note.


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-23 12:26:28)
Blinfolded chess ( part II )

Very recently, however, all the honors of Europe, in this department of indoor games, have been run away with by two young Americans, Morphy and Paulsen. Paul Morphy, a native of New Orleans, seemed to be born with chess in his blood; he played almost from childhood; and at thirteen years of age he proved a formidable antagonist to Herr Lowenthal, a noted Hungarian. In 1857, when just twenty years of age, Morphy encountered Paulsen, a native of Iowa, only a little older than himself, at a chess congress in New Orleans (Editor: It was New York!). All the gray-beards struck their flag to Paulsen, and then he struck to Morphy. Of Morphy's subsequent achievements in regular play, which stamp him as perhaps the first living chess-player (we say this with fear and trembling; however, for the knights of the game are a sensitive race), we will not speak here, for our purpose is only to notice the blindfold performances. At the chess congress above mentioned, he finely played a blindfold game with a leading German player. Early in 1858, he struck the New Orleanists with amazement by playing six games simultaneously, without seeing any other the boards; winning five of them, and exhibiting beautiful play throughout. He then came to Europe, not only to "lick the Britishers," but "all creation;" and it must be admitted that he made great progress towards that achievement. At a meeting of the Chess Association at Birmingham, in August 1858, he played eight games simultaneously, without sight of the boards. His opponents were Lord Lyttelton, and seven other persons, mostly presidents or secretaries of provincial chess clubs. Against such players, and under such tremendous conditions, he won no less than six games out of the eight, drawing a seventh, and losing the eighth. In the following month, he went over and astonished the Parisians in a similar way; he contended blindfold against eight practised players at once, at the Cafe de la Regence, a famous resort of chess-players; and out of these did not lose even one; he was the victor in six, and drew the other two. In the spring of 1859, Morphy contended against eight of the most experienced members of the London Chess Club, including Mr. Mongredien and Mr. Walker, two distinguished players. He won two games, and drew the other six--all the players except himself being wearied out by a very protracted sitting. A few days afterwards, he played with eight members of the St. George's Chess Club, including Lord Cremorne, Lord Arthur Hay, and Captain Kennedy; he won five, and the rest were drawn through want of time to finish them. Nevertheless, inconceivable as these mental labors are, Morphy yields to Paulsen in blindfold play. There are whispers of twelve or fifteen games having been tried simultaneously by the latter; but the number ten has been most certainly reached, under conditions of the utmost publicity. On the 7th of October in the present year, at a Divan in the Strand, ten players accepted Mr. Paulsen's challenge to grapple with them all simultaneously, the boards being placed out of his sight. One of the players was M. Sabouroff, secretary to the Russian Embassy in London; the other nine comprised many names well known among chess-players. Ten chess-boards were placed on ten tables in the room. An arm-chair, turned away towards a window, was mounted on a dais. At two o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Paulsen, a quiet, courteous young man, with not a trace of "brag" in him, took his seat in this arm-chair. For twelve mortal hours he never rose, never ate, never smoked, and drank nothing but a little lemonade. What were his mental labors during that time, we shall see. His ten antagonists took their seats at the ten tables; and each table speedily became the centre of a group of spectators, whose comments were not always so silent as in fairness they ought to have been. Paulsen could not see any of the chess-boards. Herr Kling, a noted player and teacher of chess, acted as general manager. He called the boards by numbers--No. 1 to No. 10. Paulsen audibly announced his first move for board No. 1; Kling made that move; the antagonist replied to it; Kling audibly announced the reply; Paulsen considered what should be his second move, and when he had audibly announced his decision, Kling made the proper move on the board. Here No. 1 rested for awhile. No. 2 now made his move, leading to the same course of proceeding as before. Then No. 3 in the same way; then No. 4; and so on to No. 10; after which No. 1 began a new cycle, by playing a second move; and thus they proceeded over and over again. Now let us see what all this implies and involves. Chess is not one of the most frolicsome of games; indeed, ladies generally declare it to be very dull, seeing that a chess-player is apt to be "grumpy" if spoken to on other matters while playing. The truth is, there is a demand for much mental work in managing a game well; the combinations and subtleties, the attacks and counter-attacks, are so numerous and varied, as to keep the mind pretty fully occupied. Nevertheless, a fine game between two fine players is mere child's play compared with this wonderful achievement of Paulsen. He was obliged to form ten mental pictures; and every picture changed with every move, like the colored bits in a kaleidoscope. Most persons, even though knowing nothing of the game, are aware that it begins with thirty-two pieces of different colors and forms, and that these move about over a board of sixty-four squares. After every change of position in any one of the pieces, Paulsen must have changed his mental picture of the board, the field of battle, and then made that a fixture until the next move was made. This is hard enough in even one game, against an antagonist who has his eyes to help him in planning attacks and defences; but how hard must it be against ten! It is difficult to conceive what is the condition of the mental machinery under such circumstances; and yet, there he sat, the calmest man in the room. When told of his antagonist's doings, one by one, he looked quietly out of window, and rubbed his chin, as a man often does when thinking, and then announced his move--never mistaking No. 1 for No. 7, No. 9 for No. 3--never failing to recover the proper mental picture, and making the proper change in it; never embarrassed; never making an unlawful move, or likely to lose sight (mental sight) of any unlawful move made by his antagonists. Nor did he obtain the least pause for mental rest. Without one minute's interval, as soon as he had announced a move for one board, he was required to attend to the move of another antagonist at another board. Hour after hour did this continue--all the afternoon, all the evening, midnight, until two in the morning. He made two hundred and seventy moves in the twelve hours, twenty-seven per game average; this gave two minutes and a quarter for the consideration of each move. As all his moves were met by corresponding moves on the part of his antagonists, he was called upon to form five hundred and forty complete mental pictures in twelve consecutive hours, each picture representing the exact mode in which all of the sixty-four squares of a chess-board were occupied. Paulsen won two games, lost three, and drew five.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-27 16:58:03)
FICGS world chess championship

A minor update in the rules that fixes many problems for future wch cycles... Nothing has changed in the rules for the 1st cycle that begins in 4 days, changes only concern next cycles, with the extension of the one-time rule mentioned above.

The equation was :

- No confusion with the cycles when entering the waiting list (2300+ players qualified for 2nd stage of the previous cycle is too confusing).

- Avoiding tournaments with too big rating gaps (and encourage high rated players to participate)

- The formula combining knockout tournament, round-robin cycle (so that everyone can play wch, with no more than 5 stages), and the final 2 players matches in the last stages.

- Making it as understable as possible...


It is now mentioned in the rules that 2300+ players will play 1st stage in high rated groups (ratings superior or equal to 2300). Winners of such groups (same criterias) will be qualified for the 3rd stage round-robin tournament, the others will play 2nd stage.

As all games are played with rapid time controls, a new cycle will probably begin every 6 months !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-30 12:50:53)
Games lost on time

Hello Paul-Iosif.

When a game is lost on time you just have to wait a few hours and the game is adjudicated automatically.

I'll try to make a replacement in the tournament soon. You may have noticed that the game has been rated as a loss for your opponent, but not as a win for you, according to the rules cause less than 10 moves have been played.


John Knudsen    (2006-07-01 17:17:01)
Format For Championship?!

8 games with 1 player at one time?! That is rather unusual, to say the least. I have never heard of such a thing... What is the reasoning behind that? John


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-01 17:20:35)
1st FICGS chess championship started !

Hello to all.

As you may have noticed, 23 new tournaments just started :

http://www.ficgs.com/category__ficgs__chess__wch.html


4 matchs (quarter final) started in the knockout tournament

QF 1 : John Anderson (SM) - Farit Balabaev (GM)
QF 2 : Daniel Cinca - Peter Schuster (SM)
QF 3 : Gilles Hervet (SM) - Gino Figlio (IM)
QF 4 : Petr Makovsky (SM) - John Knudsen (SM)


19 tournaments (groups) started in the round-robin cycle, 17 tournaments with an elo average between 1672 and 1732 (16 tournaments of 17 are in a 32 points range), and 2 "group M" with an elo average about 2390.

All round-robin tournaments are groups of 7 players as it was the best way to make it fair.

I wish you all good games and have fun :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-01 17:44:41)
Format For Championship

Hello John.

After all, if it wasn't unusual, the interest would be lower for sure... :)

So you noticed, the 8 players with the highest established correspondence chess ratings play a pure knockout tournament.

I thought about this format a long time ago (and a long time). Combining a knockout tournament (more "spectacular") and a round-robin cycle (everyone can play, no more than 5 cycles) gather together the advantages of both. It is one of the reasons I made FICGS... I think pure knockout or pure round-robin wch cycle is not efficient enough for chess championships.

The other thing you'll notice in the rules : "The special rule is that in case of equality (4-4), the winner is the player with the strongest tournament entry rating if all games are draw, the player with the lowest tournament entry rating if not all games are draw. The winner is qualified for the next stage."

This rule (in case of equality in the round-robin tournaments, the player with the strongest TER is qualified too) is another way to avoid short draws... It may sound strange at a first sight, but I really think it's fair enough and a good way to find most probably the really strongest players in the last stages. Anyway, it's amazing for sure :)


The FICGS chess wch rules :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#tournament


Peter Konig    (2006-07-02 10:50:19)
rules & ratings

Hi, the rules on registration were different, and stating personal rating seemed just to be of informative value, no checking of numbers or anything. Now, it seems that I have a disadvantage by stating that, I feel treated second class (I wholeheartedly ackowledge that there are much stronger players around) and my motivation dropped considerably. it is like in real live. There are people earning more or less money, but they should be equal before the law (rules). That's in the spirit of 1789! Je t'embrasse, Peter Konig


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-02 12:52:15)
rules & ratings

Hello Peter.

Indeed, you were one of the very first registered players. I have fixed the rules since this time, though it seems to me this point was the same already.

Anyway, ratings of course are not only informative (like in life :)), as it allows to play class tournaments. Now, there must be a way to choose a winner in certain cases, even if there's no "perfect" way. But if you win the tournament, there's no discussion. It only lights the battle a little more... When a player register he can ask for a >1700 rating only if he has got an "official" rating already, so the influence of choice is not so important at registration.

Your reference to 1789 is amazing, but actually we ARE equal before the law (rules). Doesn't mean the law is perfectly fair, that's impossible, of course. Like in life... The rules slightly favourize the best players. Je t'embrasse itou :)


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-07-02 14:51:28)
Re: France vs Brazil soccer match

I watched the match. France deserved it's 1:0 victory over Brazil, as France were clearly the better team on the day. Zinedine Zidane was at his very best, and he easily outshone the Ronaldos, Ronaldinhos etc.


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 01:07:56)
Symmetrical games

The format used(8-game match with simultaneous games, 4 white and 4 black) brings up the issue of avoiding symmetrical games. I don't see a perfect way of doing this other than being conscious of the problem, and trying to deviate early on. If I see an opening chosen by my opponent that I am also planning to use, I have waited to respond in one(or more) of the games, until the position reached a point where I would normal deviate, and choose an alternate move with the opposite colour. Anyone else with better ideas about how to avoid this problem?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 01:25:41)
Go rating list

Hello Sebastian.

So it was a GO rating about Ion... (I did not understand that :/)

Still thinking about a Go rating list... If I implement something would it be better to have only informative ratings (from federations) or rating calculated from the games played here (probably not very relevant) ?

Anyway, players who didn't play a single chess game with a rating <1700 (~not from FIDE / IECG / ICCF) won't appear on the chess rating list in a while.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 01:52:31)
Symmetrical games

Hello Gino.

What do you mean "symmetrical games" exactly ? (time is an important element)

First case, a player copies move after move another game played at the same time (a move after). Cheating is obvious and it's forbidden (rules)...

Second case, a game is symmetrical but moves are not played "at the same time" : It means suicide in the match for the player who has to win, with either Black or White... The same about the games played by the same player as White, there's no interest to play the same openings, as it would save his opponent's energy and loose chances to provoke a fault.

I had seen you were waiting to move with black in your match, but you can play the same opening with Black, it's up to your opponent to play different openings, otherwise it's good for you...


John Knudsen    (2006-07-04 05:31:49)
Symmetrical games

This format (8 games against the same player at once) is really strange and not normal at all, IMHO. Don't get me wrong - I am enjoying my games. I would not recommend this format for future versions of the quarter-final. Most strong players that I know would not even consider playing in this kind of format for one minute. Better to have a RR, with X number of players advancing from that. If you wish to make the championship attractive to stronger players, you won't want to repeat this format in the future. John


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 12:17:36)
Symmetrical games

Playing the same opening until move 20 is not a problem IMO, particularly in correspondence chess nowadays...

John, about the format, that's interesting discussing... Why wouldn't it be "normal" in your opinion ? Not usual for sure, as round-robin tournaments are used everywhere in correspondence chess. So it will be a surprise for hardened CC players, but will it be for OTB players ? Why the "match format" couldn't be an acceptable alternative ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 16:55:10)
Symmetrical games

I don't understand how it could be a problem. If one consider a critical position at the end of the opening (ie. clear advantage for White), who plays White first knows the position is bad for Black... Why would he play the same opening with Black ? It's a wrong question IMO, there are very few cases where there's only a "good" move until the end of the game.

Anyway, this question is even more relevant when playing different tournaments in different organizations (a player may respond moves played by an opponent in a game at IECG in another game at ICCF....) than in two players matches. Nothing can prevent that, but what a shame and where's the satisfaction ? I think it's not a problem there.


John Knudsen    (2006-07-04 18:50:05)
Symmetrical games

Hi Thibault: The format is unusual, and not desired, IMHO, because you do not need an 8-game match with one opponent to determine who is the superior player. Think about it - it is 4 games with white, and 4 games with black. Overkill. You mention OTB chess players. What OTB player has played an 8-game match with the same opponent, lately? Never happens. It also never happens in serious correspondence chess, except here. I do not want to complain too much, because I thank you for the neat server, and the opportunity to play some serious games for free. However, the format will need to change, in the future, if you want to attract excellent players. John


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 18:54:07)
Difficult to prove

If it's difficult to prove who is "cheating" in a match like this, it's practically impossible to prove foul play when the incident occurs in 2 different tournaments, against 2 different opponents. I'm sure this has happened in ICCF but unfortunately there is no way to detect it. I remember chessfriend claimed to have this figured out, but it was just one person's opinion. Players need to be aware of this problem and avoid it, nothing worse than being forced to play against yourself.


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 19:08:38)
8-game matches

Just to clarify my position about this format, I think it's just fine if the players are alert and avoid playing symmetrical lines/games. I actually think it's a good idea to play a simultaneous 8-game match to see who's better. It's just a bit different than your normal round-robin tournament, perhaps that makes your site unique!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 20:15:35)
8-game matches

John... ??? :)

Vladimir Kramnik - Peter Leko (match for WCH classical title)
Vladimir Kramnik - Deep Fritz...

Of course it is desired... Who will remember the names of the players in the last ICCF final tournament ? Even if ICCF doesn't use this format, and (as you say) serious CC players didn't have the opportunity to play such tournament, knockout format is still desired.

My first idea was a pure enormous knockout tournament, but it's obviously not possible (too much rounds, a time problem), that's why I thought about this combined system.

Now look at the chess world : Many players don't understand why FIDE progressively reduces the number of games and time controls in WCH matches. It is the main reason why FIDE world champion title looses value. Not hard / accurate, not spectacular enough !! ..

What many players (me, at least :)) expect is a classical world championship with a big final match. You may have noticed that FICGS champion will have the opportunity to defend his title in a... 24 games match against his challenger... (!!) That's real fight, that's real challenge and that's what I expect to see from a championship, a big opposition between 2 players, and not a round-robin more or less aleatory, with too much names, not understandable for the most.

Now, as we said on TCCMB : FICGS is not "official" matter, chess is for fun here, but chess must be a show and I'm convinced it is relevant in correspondence chess too. We'll see that ;)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 21:03:47)
Symmetrical games

Understand me, referee has to validate the evidence, nothing more. There can't be any ambiguity in this case (all moves are copied ad tempo, or not). Rules are written in this way : No human factor.

However I can't let the program close an account because of cheating :) .. There are a few players trying to use several accounts, they are automatically detected, but we can discuss (and finally close the facticious one). This site is friendly, we are not in Matrix :>


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-06 16:38:23)
Out-of-time

Hello Marc.

You just have to wait the robot to adjuge the game (takes a few hours). If your opponent tries to play a move more, the game will be adjudicated automatically.


John Knudsen    (2006-07-06 18:33:27)
Leave/Reflection Time

Hi Thibault: Of course you can take leave in any cc organization. FICGS, however, is the only one that I am aware of that, not only do you get annual leave, but also 1 day extra reflection time per day of leave! :) The concept is simply ridiculous in a 30 +1 time control format. Look, I hope you don't think I just complain about stuff - there is a lot that I like here, too. I also do have a bit of experience playing serious correspondence chess (since 1978). New cc players, or OTB players, are the last people who know anything about the ins and outs of correspondence chess, IMHO. John


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-07-08 11:08:51)
Modifying "rapid" tournament rules ?

Hello all,
Hello Thibault
As I already said in an earlyer thread, one of the reasons why I joined FICGS was the possibility to play fewer games simultaneously at a faster pace than in other corr. chess associations.
So I enrolled in a first rapid tournament where I find two things unpleasant for a so-called "rapid" category:
1. some of my opponents (and myself also) accumulated reflection time "reserves" of 40 or even 50 days in some cases, which is not appropriate for a "rapid" tournament IMHO.
2. my last unfinished game is completely won for more than ten moves now (it's K+pawns against K+pawns with an unstoppable passed pawn for me where computers announce forced mate in ... max 40 moves). My 2200+ opponent continues to play at a very slow pace. It's pretty annoying : I bet I could win my game at blitz tempo against Kasparov analysing for three days per move but I suppose I will have to play for weeks until his king is mated!

So I propose :
1. To have an absolute limitation of the time reserve a player can accumulate in rapid tournaments (30 ?)
2. To have a procedure allowing to call for external adjudication when a player refuses to resign a forcefully lost game.

Your opinion ?

Marc


Glen D. Shields    (2006-07-08 21:05:41)
Thibault You Have a Golden Opportunity

Thibault - one of the reasons that FICGS has grown so quickly is that you've welcomed input and implented the things the players have asked for. John is right on this issue. I urge you to listen to him. Take this opportunity and make FICGS the chess server that leads the way in establishing logical time rules.

Here are some suggestions for regular tournaments. You and others can build on these:
- 30 days start +2 days added per move
- 100 days maximum accumulated time
- 30 days maximum limit for one move
- 4 weeks (28 days) annual leave
- no time lost or added during leaves
- no moves made during leaves
- all time calculated by a running clock in hours and minutes

My recommendation for rapid tournaments are:
- 14 days start +1 day added per move
- 30 days maximum accumulated time
- 10 days maximum limit for one move
- 2 weeks (14 days) annual leave
- no time added or lost during leaves
- no moves made during leaves
- all time calculated by a running clock in hours and minutes

I recommend you let the server automatically handle time limit oversteps and make no exceptions. The only exception I would offer is if someone is ill or injured and needs to take an extended medical leave (these things happen). Let there be an option for that player to file an approved leave with you.

Thibault love your server and the hard work you put into it. You and others feel free to critique my suggestions. I strongly urge you to use this opportunity to lead the world in logical time rules. You don't have federations or tempermental world champions to appease. You are the boss. Do it RIGHT. Good luck.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-10 02:04:36)
Vacation and reflection time

Hi John, Glen & Heinz-Georg. Thanks for all suggestions... ;)

Some responses, particularly about vacation (towards a compromise ?) :

* 30 days + 2 days/move : Not "beautiful" (not a joke, it is design matter)

* 30 days max for one move : Not convinced it can really bring something... if a player want to last a CC game, I think no reasonable rule (without human factor) can prevent him to do so.

* 14 days + 1 day/move (rapid) : As players don't know exactly when tournaments will start, I think 30 days at start (ie. compared : email tournaments often start before the real date) is a good choice to avoid accidental forfeits during holidays !

* 2 weeks annual leave : Even for different time controls, I'm not favourable to make too many different rules.. 30 days (for all games per year) is a balanced choice IMO.

* Vacation : Ok, I make note of this. I was not favourable to any leave system, cause it's obviously a way to have days more in time trouble, even if time is frozen ! .. That's why I made it "hard" to use.. If players can stop their leave when they want, just by playing a move, it becomes easier to manage time trouble situations. The 60 days rule for 1 move was a solution avoiding vacation IMO but we discussed it already... Now I'm to decide to change the vacation rule, as John (& you) urged me. I thought it was a good thing not to prevent players to make moves during the leave... Maybe most think different, ok... However I have a problem yet with vacation as it's really a way to get more reflection time... Here is what I suggest, simply a harder rule : Players who take days leave CAN'T play during their vacation and CAN'T take days back (stopping their leave by playing a move) ! Then 2 options, players must wait their vacation end date to play again, or they can play, but provoking the cancellation of their leave (loosing the days leave taken and not used yet).. Maybe it won't be appreciated in some particular cases if players have to modify their plans, but the aim is clearly to reduce the vacation effect on the game... What do you think ?


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-07-10 10:23:56)
Materazzi

I was watching a few days ago the "best moments" of Marco Materazzi on YouTube. I can only say that, if you ever watch it, you'll know why I saw that one comming. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HblsV-urHg&search=materazzi


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-07-10 11:37:06)
Re: Marco Materazzi.......

Rodrigo, Thanks for the link! I watched it just now. "The truth is out there" about the past (mis)deeds of Marco Materazzi for all to see.


Glen D. Shields    (2006-07-10 15:21:09)
Sounds good ....

Thibault - thanks for the feedback and your openess to make changes in the vacation rules.

It's important to get some of these rules right while the player list is still relatively small and the players are still geting use to playing at FICGS. It will be harder to make rule changes in the future.

The 100 day maximum you set on accumulated time establishes FICGS as the trend setter in how to manage modern correspondence chess games. Excellent decision! Much of the problems people talk about in time control are prevented by the addition of this rule.

I'm sure you are aware the IECG has a 30 day maximum per move and the ICCF a 40 day maximum. The IECG limit is firm. You exceed 30 days once you lose. The ICCF's rule is unclear and unevenly managed. You reach 40 days, you need to beg the TD to do something. Sometimes he helps, sometimes he doesn't. Not a good situation.

Whatever limit you set at FICGS, I recommend you keep it firm and automatic like IECG. Personally I prefer 30 days, you prefer 60. IMHO 30 days is plenty of time to make a move is someone is serious about playing. 60 days is too long to wait. My preference is to make the rules enjoyable for those who want to play, not for those who sign up and then get "busy" and rudely make their opponents sit and wait. IMHO you'll attract and keep a better membership base by making the rules player friendly, not player annoying.

Thanks again. My best to you.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-10 15:51:29)
Zidane / Materazzi... provocations

Les esprits sont encore à vifs après ce moment fort du sport...

Un fil sur un événement extérieur aux échecs ou au Go ne me parait pas de trop ici, c'est une manière comme une autre d'échanger, personne n'est obligé de lire.

Je suis d'accord sur le fond avec Henri, même si la forme est un peu rude... Je suis d'accord sur le fond avec Marc pour le signaler, mais la forme est clairement TROP rude.

Nous ne sommes pas sur un terrain de football, mais un minimum de bon sens sur la forme est bienvenu où que ce soit, peu importe les sujets abordés ici et le fond du propos ! .. le coup de tête de Zidane était de trop, quelle qu'en soit la raison et ce post aussi.

J'espère que cet échange s'arrêtera ici, en tout cas sous cette forme, sans quoi j'aurai le grand bonheur de devoir modérer... :(

Bonne journée à tous...


Salvatore Cuomo    (2006-07-12 09:01:54)
Materazzi provocations.

"Materazzi Provocations".... Siete patetici ed antisportivi. Non sapete perdere e non avete il senso della misura. Zinedine Zidane non è nuovo a queste imprese, di testate agli avversari ne ha date parecchie, è un suo vizio. Ne ha date quando giocava nella Juventus e quando gioave nel Real Madrid. La cosa essenziale, in ogni caso, è che avete perso: fatevene una ragione. Salvatore Cuomo


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-07-12 14:50:41)
Re: " What Materazzi said "

World renowned lip-reading experts are in agreement as to what Materazzi has said to Zidane, which provoked Zidane's headbutt. This was in the news the last few days. What Materazzi has said is horrible! FIFA has opened an investigation into this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-20 05:51:19)
Bug fixed

Eh bien non, ce n'était pas un pirate mais un simple hasard improbable dans un océan de mathématiques... Le bug est corrigé. Merci pour le retour !


Glen D. Shields    (2006-07-22 19:50:51)
Interesting Discussion Topic

Thibault - this is a interesting discussion topic. Of course, no one knows the future with certainty, but we can all offer an opinion :)

I'm nearing my 40th year of correspondence play. Sometime later this year I will complete my 1000th tournament game. All my games were played by postcard until the mid 90's. E-mail dominated my CC schedule from about 1998 until 2002. Now I only play server chess. I've played on the FICGS, IECG, GameKnot, ChessFriend, Schemingmind and ICCF servers.

Contrary to many people who've played as long as I have, I do NOT see chess engines as a threat to the game. I think they've changed the game, but not hurt the game. I believe they've increasd CC's popularity and game quality. The same is true for opening and ending databases.

Some of the changes that will occur in CC the next ten years:

- Servers will improve functionality and ease of use.

- Due to engine use we will grow to accept 2200 as an "average" rating rather than "Master."

- Tournaments will be re-structured to include fewer players per section and shorter tournament durations. This particularly applies to ICCF where 15 player sections and slow time rules to simulate postal chess are used.

- New server functionality will be added to allow players the option to SLOW down the game. It's too easy to get caught in a mindless "server flurry."

- New chess software will be developed to analyze games. This analysis tool will give proability estimates on what engine one's opponent is using. That information will allow one to counter and plan against one's opponent.

- There will be more anti-computer books written and theories developed. We will use these techniques to beat our opponent and and improve our chess planning skills.

Bottomline ... I am excited by the new technology. I see continued advances in the way we manage our gameload, the way we send moves, the way we play, plan and analyze our moves. The way we play in the future will be different and will still be fun for those who embrace new technology. My disappointment is I am an old man and unlikely to enjoy all the advantages the future brings. I hope those who follow me enjoy what I will miss :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-23 19:54:58)
Chess thematic tournaments

Hello to all.

The 7th chess thematic tournament (waiting list is open) may be a very interesting challenge...

The opening : 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ng8

Is it a lost position or not, you can try to respond ! (it is at least very hypermodern style, but is there a name for such a manoeuvre ? :))

There are many other ideas of openings, but you can make suggestions for future thematic tournaments.

Previous ones :

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000001
King's gambit (winner : Josef riha)

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000002
Wing's gambit

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000003
Benko gambit

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000004
Orang-utan

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000005
Danish gambit

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000006
Scotch gambit


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-24 13:03:25)
Future of correspondence chess......

That's a fine analysis, Glen.

However, it's legitimate to consider that chess at a higher level is becoming much harder so that some of the very best players may stop their career, thinking that it's no worth the energy anymore, for results more influenced by 'chance' in statistics...

How many "super-grandmasters" (2700+) said that each point over this mark represents more and more work ?

It's probably the same (and more) in correspondence chess. I do think that it's still possible to improve a lot ! .. but there's a lack of a higher class of players. That's a pity the very best correspondence chess players (ie. former ICCF world champions : Joop van Oosterom, Gert Jan Timmerman...) retire or at least don't defend their title since they achieved it. Of course it's a lot of time, but result is the top class appear to be bigger and there's no clear champion. That's not good IMO to popularize correspondence chess.

All games need champions. I read recently on a Go forum that the success of Chess nowadays was due to his champions (Go is not popular yet in the west because there's noone to represent it, except a manga [Hikaru No Go]..), Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer... That's true IMO, and that's what particularly misses to correspondence chess. Maybe things won't change in ICCF (maybe I should pretend to the board :)), but anyway that's why I chose the knockout system for the FICGS world chess championship, and the possibility for the winner to play a final against a challenger. We'll see...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-24 15:52:50)
TCCMB exhibition match

Hello to all.

I couldn't resist.. chess and hormones, an explosive cocktail :)

The whole story - http://www.ficgs.com/game_2222.html


... and of course on The Correspondence Chess Message Board :
http://pub11.bravenet.com/forum/924995304


Have fun ! :)


Dirk Jan Van Dijl    (2006-07-24 18:59:04)
Copyright issues

Indeed, moves are free, but not necessarily the comments, question marks, exclamation marks etc.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-25 01:51:34)
Handicap moves

That's an idea... Actually I don't think many players (benefiting of the handicap moves) with a 200 points lower rating would be interested, cause it's quite "risky" to play with an advantage. If you win, that's just normal, if you loose (even draw): that's a big defeat.

Such matches may be interesting for both masters (2400+) and amateurs (1600-), maybe even in a simultaneous context, so that draws could satisfy everyone.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-26 20:46:02)
New profile feature : Photos :)

Just added this new feature in 'Preferences'. You can now upload a photo... (JPG format, 100 ko max)

Thanks to Dinesh for the idea (indirectly). By the way, for live video chat you can use other services... :) (we are still there to play chess ;))


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-28 02:31:50)
Blogs !

Everyday a new feature, I keep in the rhythm ;)

You may have noticed this link ('see the players blog') at the top of the forum page. A new interface that simply looks like the forum, but built like a blogs website.

You may want to relate your Chess life or Go philosophy, your games or whatever.. you can do it there.

Like in the forum, links are automatically parsed. The html < br > tag to begin a new line. Comments by everyone are also available.


Pablo Schmid    (2006-07-28 21:39:19)
..

Je ne sais pas quelle partie n'aurait pas compté. Mais avec mon ELO actuel à 1736 max, il faudrait que j'ai battu un adversaire en dessous de 1386 ce qui n'est pas le cas. Enfin bon au pire tampis c'est pas dramatique.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-01 11:52:23)
PGN format

Hello Mark.

The correct move was Nbd2 ... "1" is useless in Nb1d2, as "b" is enough to know what knight is moving. If the knight had taken a piece, the notation would have been Nbxd2 ...

I suggest you to familiarize with PGN format (Portable Game Notation). You can check the link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Game_Notation

The best way is to look at many PGN games...


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-08-02 22:14:10)
Request for adjudication & rules

In game *** my opponent has a completely lost position for more than 2 months by now and refuses to resign.
How long will he require that I play child-level uninteresting moves?
I announce mate in 8 moves and request adjudication against this completely disgraceful way of playing.
I am evidently able to prove the win.
I already said how I felt this kind of proceeding to be completely disgusting.

If my requirement is not fulfilled I will leave this site being the first master-class tournament winner.

Nice...

Marc


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-02 23:07:36)
Adjudication, forced mate & rules

Hello Marc.

According to the rules, the game has been adjudicated.

I think this is a good moment to discuss this adjudication rule.. (see 11.5 - http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html)

Surely it can be improved, but how.. I'd like to have players opinion on what cases (position + time) should be adjudicated or not, so that we find a better & fair compromise.

Any ideas ?

Thibault


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-08-02 23:52:15)
Adjudication

Thanks Thibault.

I was not aware of the 11.5 rule which is very good IMHO and I am very glad that you agreed to apply it in my game.
I think this is a good rule "as is" and it does not need to be changed.

To Graham : Sure you are right.

But it's the same in OTB play : almost nobody waits until the final mate move.
However when one disgracefully requires you go until mate has effectively been done, you just have to wait for less than a few hours at most.
In my case the win was evident for more than two months and my opponent still meticulously waited until he only had a few hours left...
Did he wish to wait for a new rating,did he wish to have won other games to take the lead in the tournament : I really don't know (and I truly cannot fully understand)...
In any case the rules were respected...
Maybe this could be an additional argument for limiting the maximum amount of accumulated thinking time ?

Marc


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-03 20:30:44)
Update of the 11.5 rule

A small update of the 11.5 rule, that should clarify some ambiguous cases (referee calls are stored) :

"In some cases, the game continues but the result is obvious. If a player doesn't want to resign (or accept draw) and obviously last the game, his opponent may report to referee a first time. If the player takes 30 days more to finish the game, his opponent may call referee another time, then the game will be adjudicated. An analysis submitted by a player should contain sufficient information so that no doubt is possible. This may include a sequence of moves, but in some circumstances it may be sufficient to claim a win or a draw on the basis of material or positional advantage. Final decision belongs to referee."


Gino Figlio    (2006-08-04 02:55:44)
tricks

Hi Thibault,

Players use tricks to distract the opponent when they suspect they are losing, one of them is offering draws many times, another trick is to delay the game.

I am afraid this rule can be used as another trick by a player losing the game, but still able to call the referee and claim a draw.

If you allow them to do this once a month, even better for them.

I suggest using more strict criteria to call the referee: obvious checkmate or tablebase win...otherwise this rule may be abused to distract the opponent...

Best,

Gino


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-04 12:02:56)
tricks

Hi Gino.

You may be right... However many cases (ie. clear material advantages, draws in closed positions) couldn't be considered. I think we can try this rule as is, if it's not sufficient I'll add some criterias or abuse cases.

Note : This rule also works for Go game (and all games on FICGS)!

I think that's an interesting rule, as the "human decision" (I agree with you it must be avoided as much as possible) finally is provoked by the player who obviously lasts the game.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-08-07 22:23:56)
Suggestion (sponsors)

Thibault, Are you looking at the possibility of getting some sponsors for this FICGS website in the near future?! If it materialises, it'll be a win-win situation for all.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-08-09 07:47:30)
Re: download

Hey, Graham When you click the game number, it takes you to a page where there's a "download" link down at the bottom. When you click it, the game file will download in pgn format. ( Yes, altogether it would be two clicks. If you mistakenly click it for a third time, you'll launch a nuclear bomb! Haha! Just kidding ).


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-10 11:56:01)
Vacances

Bonjour Samy.

Je confirme que le temps des parties ne s'écoule pas (un simple refresh le démontre)... Et je vois qu'il y a "zeitnot" en effet dans certaines parties. La partie perdue au temps l'a été visiblement juste avant que ces vacances soient prises (et sera adjugée automatiquement)... Désolé, la cadence rapide n'est pas si facile à tenir, je le constate moi même.


Jaimie Wilson    (2006-08-11 16:10:55)
Unrated miniatures

I read that games are not rated for the winner if less than 10 moves have been played by his opponent (most probably forfeit or obvious cheating). So if my opponent plays brilliantly, lures me into a catastrophic error and mates me on move 9, then he or she would not get any rating benefit.


Graham Wyborn    (2006-08-13 17:32:35)
(download) in Go games!

Recently started playing Go. Similar problem to (download) in chess. If I hoover over the Go (download) button, the ballon reads, "Download this game in PGN format". If I press it, it tries to download game into my chess database!
Can you help? You solved it last time, can you do it again?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-17 21:57:51)
Ratings FIDE / ICCF

Hello Benjamin.

These players probably have an established correspondence chess rating over 2000 at ICCF or IECG. Players can't be forced to specify their FIDE rating, but they can do it in the 'player informations' text area.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-20 21:59:53)
TCCMB exhibition match

Game over, John did it well !

http://www.ficgs.com/game_2222.html

I hoped a miracle until the end. The trap did not work, 28.Qd8+ and it was probably a draw... After 28.Qf8+ ! .. I only can resign. Lots of fun :)

I'll look at the next chess thematic tournament (same opening) with interest...

Thanks to John Knudsen for this nice game !


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-08-22 12:04:09)
Thematic Blackmar

Hi Thibault

I think you should go one move further for the Blackmar thematic tourney (2..dxe4).
In the present definition you will get loads of French and Caro-Kann defences through 2..e6 or 2..c6 !

:-)))

Marc


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-08-22 12:32:21)
Re: Thematic Blackmar......

Hey, Marc & Thibault! Look at this: 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 c6 4. Nxe4 Bf5/Nd7/Nf6 (It's still a Caro-Kahn!). OR 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 e6 4. Nxe4 Nf6/Nd7 (It's still a French Defence!). Haha!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 14:36:59)
Re: Thematic Blackmar......

Hi Marc & Dinesh... You're right. Anyway it's too late, already 5 (!) players in the waiting list. So we'll see...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 14:55:18)
How to know future rating

Hello to all.

A reminder about future rating and personal statistics... You can check it by going into Preferences, click on the picture just after your chess rating, a new window will appear, then click on "elo"... Several pages with different informations will be displayed.

You can check these informations for any player, by clicking on this pic in the rating list.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 16:48:47)
Thematic Blackmar : 1 day !

Obviously, you were interested in playing Blackmar thematic tournament. The waiting list has been completed in only 1 day :)

I'll try to find more openings like this one...


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 17:48:09)
I prefer the following Gambit

Ok, here my idea, for one of the following thematic tourneys.

The Goering Gambit:

1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 exd4
4.c3 dxc3
5.Nxc3

This Gambit is full of great tactical play.

Benny


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 19:18:37)
New Thematic - Tourney Trompowsky !

Hi,

since 3 days i have the Chessbase DVD "The Trompowsky - The easy way" (http://www.chessbase.com/shop/product.asp?pid=249&user=&coin=). Thank you for starting a thematic tornament with the Trompowsky-Opening. The right time, to test my knowledge about the DVD.

Benny


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 19:52:28)
Thematic tournaments & King's gambit

Danish gambit and scotch gambit have been played already. (not far)

FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000005
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000006

I'll keep the idea...

Where did you see that king's gambit is not playable ??? Disproved doesn't mean anything IMO... (& this is probably the most known chess 'troll' :))


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 20:12:07)
Disproved

Ok,

i got my knowledge by GM Roman Dzindzihasvili's Video-Tapes, some studys and a lot of played games of Kings Gambit. Latvian isn't good too. I think, with a good computer and a good knowledge about kings gambit, the minimum what black can reach is a draw. If white play latvian, black will win ever. Latvian Gambit is so easy to calculate with a computer. Black has from the beginning on, no move-options.

But we can try both desasters in a thematic-tourney.

Benny


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-26 01:37:37)
"NEW" Opening Idea !

Hello,

i would be very happy, to see the following line in a thematic opening tourney:

1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Bc5
4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4
6.cxd4 Bb4+
7.Nc3 Nxe4
8.0-0 0-0!

ok folks, i am searching for this line in my database and found just a handfull games, played by low rated players. I am searching in many books for this line, but i found nothing ! I've analysed this line and i believe, this line is good for BLACK ! What do you think about this line ??? Do you see more than me ? Do you have any GM-Commentary about this line ? Maybe in an ebook or something else ? Please help me to find the answer, why this line is never played by some very good players. It would be helpful, to start a thematic-tourney'bout this nice line.

Benny


Don Burden    (2006-08-26 18:51:54)
Opening Idea

I'd say it is a fairly big advantage to black. He's a solid pawn up and threatens to win another. Found two games in my database with higher rated players:

[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Majewski, Jan"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2335"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "122"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. Ba3 Nxd6 14. Bxd6 cxd6 15. Qxd6 Ne8 16. Qd5 Nf6 17. Qd6 Ne8 18. Qd2 d6 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. Rad1 d5 21. Bb3 h6 22. Ne4 Bg4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. f3 Qb6+ 25. Qd4 Be6 26. Bxd5 Bxd5 27. Qxb6 axb6 28. Rxd5 Rxa2 29. f4 Rc8 30. Rd3 Rc2 31. Ree3 Ra8 32. h4 Raa2 33. Rg3 Rd2 34. Rde3 Kf8 35. Re4 b5 36. Re5 Rab2 37. Rc5 b4 38. Rc8+ Ke7 39. cxb4 Rxb4 40. Rxg7 Rxf4 41. Rh7 Rf6 42. Kh2 Ke6 43. h5 Rd5 44. g4 Rd4 45. Kg3 Rd3+ 46. Kg2 Rd6 47. Re8+ Kd7 48. Rf8 Ke7 49. Rhh8 Ke6 50. Re8+ Kd5 51. Re7 b6 52. Rf8 Rf4 53. Kg3 Rdf6 54. Rc8 Rf3+ 55. Kg2 Rf2+ 56. Kg1 R2f4 57. Rg8 b5 58. Re3 b4 59. Kg2 Kd4 60. Rb3 Rb6 61. Kg3 Rf1 0-1

[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mathias, Manfred"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. dxc7 Qxc7 14. Qb3 d5 15. Bd3 Be6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Qc2 g6 18. Bb2 Ne8 19. Re2 Neg7 20. Rbe1 Rfe8 21. Qd2 Nd6 22. c4 dxc4 23. Qc3 f6 24. Bxg6 hxg6 25. Qxf6 Qf7 26. Rxe6 Qxf6 27. Rxf6 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 Re8 29. Nf3 Re2 30. Be5 Nf7 31. Bd4 Re6 32. Kf1 Rxf6 33. Bxf6 b5 34. Bc3 Ne6 35. h4 Nf4 36. a3 Nd5 37. Bb4 a6 38. g3 Kg7 39. Ke2 Kf6 40. Ba5 Nd6 41. g4 Nb7 42. Bd2 a5 43. Bg5+ Kg7 44. Ne5 c3 45. Kd3 b4 46. Kc4 Nb6+ 47. Kd4 Nc5 48. axb4 axb4 49. f3 Nd5 50. Nc4 Ne6+ 51. Kd3 Nxg5 52. hxg5 b3 53. Na3 Kf7 54. f4 c2 55. Nxc2 Nxf4+ 0-1



Ryaad Aabid    (2006-08-27 14:33:55)
CheckMate = Not lost yet

FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_C__000006 (type : rated round-robin , increment : 40 days / 10 moves) Game 972 Hi! The mentioned game is still at my games list ! Thanks for your attention. Ryaad


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-27 14:49:29)
CheckMate = Not lost yet

Hello Ryaad.

"Reminder : Chess games are not adjudicated automatically if a player is checkmated. You still have to resign (rules)."

Kind regards.


Julien Baudement    (2006-08-29 19:44:00)
Go (re ->Thibault de Vassal)

Ou bien il bluffe, ou bien il est très fort car il m'a assez rapidement demandé si je connaissait les règles ! Pourtant, je n'avais pas particulièrement l'impression de jouer mal !! Une petite question technique, comme dans lesègles usuelles, après qu'on ait pass 2x, on décompte les points, c'es fait automatiquement ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-31 01:51:59)
Go (re -> Julien)

Points are not counted automatically in Go games (not possible), even after both players pass... Players may discuss the score by passing more than 2 times, but in all cases one of them has to resign to end the game (or call referee in case of disagreement)...

About your Go games, I saw you use a personal strategy quite far from theory (basically corners, bands, then center)... Original one, but it will be hard, undoublty :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-31 03:16:24)
New best game...

Finally, we have a new "best game", after about 2 months of clear domination by chess game 342...

Game 2198, from the scotch gambit chess thematic tournament, is a funny King's hunt :)


Marius Zubac    (2006-09-01 16:19:35)
Title norms page update

Hi, My question is how and when is the title norms information page (from player's statistics) get updated. Thanks


Dirk Ghysens    (2006-09-05 12:16:53)
Time control in thematics

How about time controls in thematic tournaments? Suppose the first 12 moves are "given": are there still 40 days for the first 10 moves then?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 12:42:18)
Time control in thematics + Winning time

Hello Dirk & Ulrich

That's a good remark ! .. The program wouldn't add these first 40 days in thematic tournaments, as move 10 has already been played. Anyway that's fair IMO and not so important with this slow time control.

Ulrich, the answer is yes, the faster you play, the more time you save for the rest of the game...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 16:21:34)
Tournament winners & leaders displayed !

Hello to all.

Tournament winners & leaders (2 at most) are now displayed in all tournament categories. Just click 'Tournaments' and see...

These informations are not displayed in real time, but will be updated at least every 2 months (while chess rating calculation)

All comments welcome.


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-05 17:03:50)
Time to display all informations

35 seconds - but the page is great


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 17:04:09)
Translation : Draw proposal

Hello Karlheinz !

Humm... Babelfish just told me it could (very) approximatively mean : "Your opponent offered a draw".

I still do not speak a single word in German... :/

Thanks for your help.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 17:07:17)
Time to display all informations

Hmm.. That's a real problem :/

Could you tell me more about your processor / browser / internet speed ?
(by email if you prefer)

Thanks !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 17:40:48)
Time to display all informations

Do you know your computer (processor) speed ? That's very slow...


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-05 17:52:21)
Time to display all informations

Pentium 4, 3 GHz

I have closed all "working" applications (Word, Excel), but the time is the same.

How much time takes your browser?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 18:08:35)
Time to display all informations

....... don't laugh :)

More than 60 seconds. I have a timeout, so I can't even load the whole page !

Reason is first a ~33kbps connection (no adsl where I live), then a slow computer, for internet only.. :))

This is prehistory here ;)


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-05 18:26:38)
Time to display all informations

No reason to laugh. Excuse my question! I hope you don't have to develop these wonderful programs at this computer ... Or with what have you earned this punishment?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-05 19:27:54)
Time to display all informations

Of course not. I have other computers... But slow connections have advantages : Finally I just can't loose too much time on the internet this way, watching 'youtube' videos or hunting divx & mp3 on edonkey, bit torrent...

So, convinced ? .. do we exchange ? :)


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-05 23:13:06)
Time to display all informations

... watching videos, hunting for divX and mp3? What's that all? No time! I had to find the next move in the game no 1


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 03:41:02)
Time to display all informations

It seems complications did not begin yet... :)

Heinz-Georg, could you try a last time to load the tournament (with boards) page ? It should run 'a bit' faster now... Thanks !


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-06 09:04:10)
Time to display all informations

~ 15 seconds now.

I suspect the program uses most of the time to collect the information from the database tables. If I save the page it needs less than 400 kilobytes.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 13:21:27)
Time to display all informations

Actually, it's only due to recursive call s to other files...

I firstly thought this slowness was caused by browsers because of all the pictures to display. I was wrong... Now the program is less "beautiful", but it works much faster, don't you think ? ;)




Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-09-06 14:16:25)
Time to display all informations

yes, it is much faster than the first version.

Two remarks:

- The reflection time also is shown if the game is already ended - and the time goes on.
- What does it mean if a text stands above the diagram? Example: in the game 1626 (FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_12__000001) I can read "ok".


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 14:42:30)
Time to display all informations

It's all corrected. Thanks for your help !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 15:43:12)
FIDE WCH : Kramnik vs. Topalov

Do you believe it ? .. now it's most probably almost sure :-)

We'll have a new FIDE-Classical world champion in a few weeks !

A reminder : This will be a 12-games match, taking place from September 21 to October 13 in the capital of Kalmykia (whose president is FIDE president : Kirsan Ilyumzhinov himself), Elista. In case of equality, four rapid games will be played, if equality again two blitz games will be played and finally a sudden death blitz game. The prize fund of one million US dollars will be equally divided between Vladimir Kramnik and Veselin Topalov, whatever the result. The looser won't play the next world championship tournament (quite strange).

Anyway, that's a great thing for chess, even if I'm not very optimistic for the next FIDE world championship cycles, particularly if the world champion has to play a knockout tournament, instead of a classical 12 or 24 games match...

My favourite in this match is still Kramnik because of his style, but Topalov is really getting stronger IMO... It will be a hard match !

Any predictions about the result & games ? .. Will Vladimir Kramnik play his Berlin defense in the Ruy Lopez again...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 23:44:33)
Vladimir Kramnik vs. Peter Leko

Hi Dinesh.

I still can't explain myself this incredible outcome in Brissago. First, this "extraordinary" Marshall gambit, Leko leading the whole match... At last Kramnik winning the very last game. Then Peter Leko smiling, just saying (~) : "I'm glad about my play." .. and that's finished.

It just reminded me the second match Kasparov vs. Deep Blue ...

Anyway, it's always time to be paranoid :-)


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-09-07 06:40:18)
Re:

I'm almost certain that Kram. will dump the 1.e4 opening, as his only Achille's Heel seems to be all out tactics (which Top. is brilliant at), and some blunders (but that was when he was ill). Regarding Leko.......he might fancy his chances if he meets Kram. again, but I don't see any sorta match up, as Anand is waiting in the wings to have a shot at either Kram. or Top.


Charlie Neil    (2006-09-07 09:02:54)
Krammik vs Topalov

Krammik will play 1.Nf3 with his 1st 5 games with white and as Topalov is dozing off.....POW! It's going to be a tense match. A clash of styles I'd say. But it is all good for chess. We need an undisputed OTB champion again, it can only be good for chess. ( A million dollars for the best of twelve games.....I think I'll go and buy myself a database....:-)


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-09-07 14:11:14)
Re:

Thibault, regarding your question..... I was 3rd in that Candidates Final. I was just 1/2 point short of getting into the top 2 and automatically qualifying for the FINAL. But as the first placed Nigel Robson is also qualified by another cycle, and as my rating is quite high now, I might get a chance to play in the FINAL there.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-08 18:10:52)
Chess tournament : Zero-sum or not ?

While discussing about Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", and the question "Is the best player always the champion ?" (of course not IMO) , I was argued that any chess tournament "was" (actually could be "reduced to") a zero-sum game :

"In 1944 John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern proved that any zero-sum game involving n players is in fact a generalised form of a zero-sum game for two persons, and that any non-zero-sum game for n players can be reduced to a zero-sum game for n + 1 players; the (n + 1) player representing the global profit or loss. This suggests that the zero-sum game for two players forms the essential core of mathematical game theory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_sum_game

It seems to me that it's out of topic, but I couldn't say exactly why... In my opinion, a tournament is nearer life than game, at least quite far from it. Much more rules, often complex ones, and results that depend on many parameters you couldn't influence...

The word "champion" depends on accurate rules (the best player could finish 2nd, even if he wins all games ie. in an open tournament..), the "best player" depends on general opinion (most commonly through ratings), ie. Topalov vs. Kasparov ...

What do you think ? :-)


Where the discussion started from :

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060907/sirlin_01.shtml

I agree with many points about how to win, but the use of some words seems to be dubious...

I like much this quote :

"I was surprised to see that Capablanca did not initiate any active maneuvers and instead adopted a waiting game. In the end, his opponent made an imprecise move; the Cuban won a second pawn and soon the game. “Why didn’t you try to convert your material advantage straight away?” I ventured to ask the great chess virtuoso. He smiled indulgently. “It was more practical to wait.” "

—Mikhail Botvinnik, 6th World Chess Champion


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-09-10 16:19:37)
Re: Money Tournaments.......

I'm optimistic! Probably double-player matches might be more popular than multi-player tournaments in Money Tournaments category, as it gives a better chance to win. Some players might play it for fun too, if GMs could be challenged for a fee. Many possibilities why it'll be a success.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2006-09-10 22:54:54)
Not only the opening

With normal openings that you like only the personal power matters. Don't pay attention to such bullshit openings. It is worth to think about 1.b4, 1.g4 or 1.a3. These 3 examples are the border.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-11 00:26:57)
1.b4

Hello Ulrich.

1.b4 is not bad enough :) The idea is to organize ie. money matches (with only 1 game) & tournaments where draws can't happen.