Back to forum
Wayne Lowrance (2006-05-17)
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
Per Lea (2006-05-17 13:27:46)
FICGS is not alone....
I have encountered a similar problem on another website: when accepting an offer of a draw, the system wouldn't accept the result unless you played a move as well!
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-17 13:41:07)
I just realized...
... that the "call referee" option was not reachable when it's not your turn in a game :/ I'll fix that soon ! It should arrange the situation.
Sorry about that.
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 !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-17 15:24:43)
"Call referee" fixed.
Now you can ask for an adjudication (even if it's not your turn). Thanks again for feedback.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-17 20:44:05)
Delay before adjudication request
About the game you request for adjudication, Wayne... I see you played your last move 2 days ago. It's a bit early... Please wait about a ten days before calling referee, even if your opponent takes 5 days for each move... This is correspondence chess... and we have time :) In email games (with the same time) such situations may take much more time... Be patient ! It doesn't prevent you to enter a new tournament, and next rating calculation won't occur before july.
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)
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)
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.
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 may have some more comments later on but at the moment i've said enough.
Thanks for this site Thibault!
Wayne Lowrance (2006-05-19 08:05:25)
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
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-19 11:09:58)
Thanks for the suggestion, Wayne. Actually, I'm to implement a "comments" feature (see the discussion in a thread below). I don't think it's a perfect solution ! Of course it's a way to solve this problem, but it will create other problems with other abuses ! Anyway, it's a positive point more for comments. As David Grosdemange said, only players should be able to chat before the game ended. I think I'll do it this way...
Henri Muller (2006-05-19 11:33:45)
délai de reflexion
Il me semble qu'il existe un sérieux problème dans le système de décompte des jours de réflexion. Il suffit de jouer qques coups, et on dispose ainsi de plus de 40 jours de rélexion!!! Aberrant. N'y aurait-t-il pas moyen de faire un double décompte, en obligeant le joueur à jouer AU MOINS UN COUP tous les 5 ou 6 jours ? Ainsi, un joueur a répondu aux DEUX premiers coups de la partie, et il dispose de 40 jours de réflexion !!?? Un tournoi, à cette allure, si les deux joueurs s'y mettent, peut durer des ANNEES !!.... ce n'est certainement pas le but du concepteur !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-19 11:43:00)
re : Délai de réflexion
Ce sont là ni plus ni moins les règles des échecs par correspondance ! :) Une partie peut en effet durer un an dans certains cas, et c'est souvent le cas dans d'autres organisations. Force est de constater que les parties se déroulent ici beaucoup plus rapidement que dans d'autres organisations, mais il n'y a pas d'autres règles de temps raisonnables (ce n'est pas faute d'y avoir pensé). Tout le monde ne peut pas jouer aussi rapidement, il est quasi impossible de trouver une demi mesure entre les cadences classiques et les cadences par correspondance utilisant un incrément d'un jour par coup minimum...
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 (2006-05-23 10:26:09)
Ce n'est pas aussi simple. Les sites employant des règles de temps aussi dures (10 jours par coup ou moins) s'exposent à d'autres problèmes, et à de nombreuses parties gâchées... Le temps d'attente est inévitable par correspondance. La limitation du cumul du temps limitera les abus, mais les joueurs ont de toutes façons le choix de jouer des tournois rapides uniquement !
Je pense que le site est bien équilibré sur la question du temps désormais. J'ai une certaine expérience du jeu par correspondance et des problèmes posés par les cadences, et je suis convaincu que la formule actuelle conviendra au plus grand nombre. N'oublions pas que nombre de joueurs ne peuvent pas jouer aussi rapidement !
Per Lea (2006-05-24 10:14:43)
Elo list no longer searchable by country
The idea to have flags in the rating list looked like a nice feature at first, but the disadvantage is that it is no longer possible to do a quick serach for players from a specific country. For example, it is interesting to find out if there are any new memebers from your own country. So, instead of letting the computer search for "NOR", I now have to manually read through the complete list. A good alternative would be to let the members sort the rating list by country and name (as on Chessfriend.com)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-24 10:18:34)
Players / Country
Hello Per. I'm just working on (and other new stuff) ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-24 14:46:20)
Here are some new features :
- Countries directory - http://www.ficgs.com/directory_countries.html
(with players sorted by name)
- Players sorted by rating for each country (click on the flags on the rating list)
- More player statistics (results with white and black, elo average opponents)
Xavier Pichelin (2006-05-25 21:56:00)
delai de reflexion
J'ai lu quelque commentaire en francais sur les durée des parties. Je trouve que obliger de jouer tous les 6 ou 7 jours est pas judicieux. Car il suffit qu'on parte en déplacement la semaine au niveau professionnel ca m'arrive fréquement donc on arrive au week-end et on doit répondre une vintaine de parties voire plus car on joue aussi a ICCF et autres en un week end sous peine de perdre?? Mois ça m'est arrivé de jouer un coup en 15 jours afin de réguler les autres parties et le temps d'analyser ses parties en cours. Non je trouve que c'est utile de jouer vite les débuts afin d'augmenter considérablement le temps de reflexion afin de ne pas blitzer pour jouer correctement. Aussi il est vrai que certain joueurs non fair-play sur une partie archie perdue vous fait attendre avant d'abandonner ou simplement perdre au temps!. C'est valable aussi dans les autre instances ou certain joue 1 coup tous les 39 jours pour faire durer le plaisir!!! Amicalement Xavier.
Henri-Louis Muller (2006-05-29 14:49:35)
delai de reflexion
Merçi pour les commentaires et la réponse. Il y a à boire et à manger dans tout cela. Mais je me rallie à vos opinions à tous. Il est vrai que le jeu par correspondance est aussi - parfois - un jeu de patience !
Tom Hodges (2006-06-01 05:46:34)
go server issues
Regarding the Go games: 1. 30 days is way to short. A go game takes about 200-250 moves so at 2/day it needs over 100 days. This is a deal breaker. 2. There should be a link to send and go the next game where you are on turn.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 06:17:28)
FICGS go rules + quick link
You have 30 days + 1 day / move !
About the 'quick link', that's a good idea, I'll think about that.
[Chess forum] [Rating lists] [Countries] [Chess openings] [Legal informations] [Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]