|
|
|
There are 0 results for Lu Samuel in the games. There are 19 results for Lu Ke in the games. Game_17870 Game_17871 Game_17872 Game_17873 Game_17874 Game_17875 Game_22701 Game_22703 Game_22803 Game_22700 Game_22702 Game_22699 Game_22805 Game_22696 Game_22697 Game_22698 Game_22802 Game_22804 Game_22801 There are 702 results for Lu in the forum. Hannes Rada (2006-04-08 19:06:49) Vacations The most important issue to be implemented is imho the vacation. I think otherwise many potential players (me included) will be prevented from joining a tournament. How many days a year would you allow ? Per Lea (2006-04-09 11:50:32) Vacations OK, Hannes, you're right. When you leave "The modern world" my comments no longer apply... And, by the way: I fully support the idea of some sort of "vacation". After all, not everyone is obsessed with chess 24 hours/day. There are other valuable things in life as well! Often, it can be fun just to relax, and forget all about difficult middle-games, irritating colleagues at work and the disappointments of your local football team and just go away - to Vanuatu (wherever that mey be) Henri Muller (2006-04-10 10:56:31) success Bravo et félicitations à Thibault ! Un TRES grand et mérité succès pour ce nouveau site. Bien pensé, bien ordonné, et....facile ( quand on s'y est fait !! ) Il y a qqs jours quand je me suis inscrit, j'étais le 39ème. Il y a déjà plus de 120 membres....et cela continue ! J'espère que Thibault sera en mesure d'assumer ce ghrand succès, car le travail ne manquera pas ! COURAGE - BONNE CHANCE ert....FELICITATIONS !! hm Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-10 12:53:29) FICGS and internet Hello to all & thanks again for support. I announced FICGS starting into main chess forums (FIDE, TCCMB, Talkchess, France-Echecs...), now working on search engines. Feel free to talk about it in other forums (in your country or chessclub) and to your chessfriends... Website success is here, and the more players, the more players :) Thank you in advance. Have good games ! Patrice Verdier (2006-04-10 22:19:36) Possibility Job I have been club chess president. I can organize tournaments, proceed rating calculator, write rules, doing relation with others organisation (ICCF, IECG,...). I have some ideas also for tournament with fee and prizes Jose Carrillo (2006-04-11 23:26:39) Fischer Random Chess / Chess960 Hello all! I'm the moderator of the Fischer Random Chess email Club (FRCEC) and I'm always looking for sites in the net that support Chess960, to promote them in my club, and to use to coordinate Chess960 events. To visit FRCEC got to: http://frcec.chess960.info/ Jose Carrillo Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-12 12:46:22) FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM About titles obtained on FICGS, it would be the same ones. We have choice : We could add a special letter, from the organization the title comes from (very confusing I think : IIM.. IECG / ICCF) .. or consider EM, IM, SM, GM are "official" titles, and FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM are the other ones, including FICGS ones... Probably not perfect. Any idea ? Dinesh De Silva (2006-04-12 12:52:51) FEM,FIM,FSM,FGM How about contacting IECG, ICCF etc and reaching an amicable solution regarding how to name the titles on FICGS?! 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... Dinesh De Silva (2006-04-12 14:15:16) Solution... I have 2 suggestions which might be viable..... *The FICGS decision making committee should make a decision regarding it. OR *Have some sorta poll/voting on FICGS to decide on it. 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. Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-14 05:16:26) re: Proposal What do we call "legitimacy", "official" ? This is quite subjective. In my opinion each organization can create his own titles and choose to recognize titles from other ones. IECG titles are recognized by FICGS, but it's obvious titles from FIDE / ICCF have more value in players mind (legitimacy is not the subject), and players from everywhere could appreciate this distinction. Anyway the FICGS council will discuss about that. Hannes Rada (2006-04-14 19:34:41) Vacation I agree with Hakon's proposal. In my opinion the possibiliy to take leave is absolutely essential. Happy Easter ! Per Lea (2006-04-15 00:01:42) Minor notational bug... In game 8, I had Rooks on f8 and b8. I played 18...Ra8 on the screen, but when I list the game, the move is recorded as Rba8. The "b" is superfluous, the f8 Rook can't move to a8. In game 13, I had Rooks on d6 and d1 and played 18.Rxd8. This came out as R6xd8. The "6" is superfluous. These are not serious errors, but it is a bit irritating.... Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-16 12:21:01) Håkon & Glen Håkon, you're right (no need to receive his own moves). It will be changed this hour. Glen, you can change board color in preferences. At least you have choice : Grey, Red, Blue, Green. About the size & other pieces, not impossible, I'll see that. Glen D. Shields (2006-04-16 18:57:19) 60/10 Too Slow for Me I'm in the group that thinks 60/10 is too slow. Like Mr. LaCrosse, I like fewer games at a faster pace. Only way 60/10 might work is to set a REASONABLE limit on days per move. ICCF's 40 days is too long and some TD's are much too lenient about extending it. I hope this doesn't hijack your thread Thibault, but The opposite question I'd like to ask is how many server players find the opening game too fast and like a blur? I make a move and there's a reply waiting 5 minutes later. It won't be long before someone writes a script and connects it to ChessBase to cut the time down to seconds :) Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-18 13:25:56) Time limit per move If a player has 60 days and more on his clock, the deadline for one move is 60 days ! This is a provisional (quite good, I think) solution before question of vacation be answered. Many players can't play every day and correspondence chess games usually last several months, often more than 1 year. It seems server games go much faster than email games, but rules 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves are the same. Time limit per move in IECG is 30 days. Here, a 60 days limit (a rating period) don't seem too much to me. Players won't feel oppressed (Glen, turn email notification off :)) and I think they won't use it often. RAPID TOURNAMENTS are an alternative solution. Thibault Graham Cridland (2006-04-25 17:22:16) Hmm. Well, I see your point (I have an opponent like that) but what you're really objecting to is their failure to use their time, not conditional moves (or even fritz). And I can't imagine that forcing people to use their time will be popular. Just have to NOT send the move back right away, sit down at the board, and figure out where Fritz goes wrong. Our German friend isn't all knowing (especially at the 14-16 ply people only give him much of the time). So you should generally win those games. Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-26 01:33:22) Finally... Less than 2 hours later, the second Class C tournament started :) I hope the first CHESS 960 tournament will begin soon. (Special tournaments category) See the Help section to see the start position. More about Chess 960 / Fischer Random on Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer_random_chess Quad tournaments and other categories will appear later, but feel free if you have any idea for special events (teams from countries, other clubs or websites etc...) Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-01 19:01:58) Class tournaments Salut David ! About standard & rapid "class" tournaments, they are open to players with ELO rating included into a range, specified just below the tournament name. (ie. CLASS M : 2200 to 2600 , CLASS A : 2000 to 2400 , CLASS B : 1800 to 2200 etc...) J'espère que tu nous feras profiter de ton gambit favori ;) Bonnes parties ! Amir Bagheri (2006-06-13 11:22:45) FICGS this site looks like a great site just cant wait to get started...Nice to see that Suat Atalik is there as i am of to turkey next month and hope to meet him in his club in taksim (istanbul) 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 (2006-05-14 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 Per Lea (2006-05-17 13:39:50) Criteria for Best game Can someone please tell me why 11 votes have been cast for game 156 as Best game? The way I see it, Black blunders on move 9 to lose the exchange, and finishes off with a howler on move 17. Or have I missed something here? 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. Glen D. Shields (2006-05-19 03:43:15) Oops ... sorry! Oops .. this belongs in the discussion on "the overall evaluation of this site." My apology. Perhaps Thibault could kindly move the above post to the proper place and delete this apology? I'd be very appreciative. Thanks! 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 Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-19 11:09:58) Re: Suggestion 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 Bonjour Henri. 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... Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-23 10:26:09) Time reflexion 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 ! Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-23 23:02:54) Votes Hello Ryaad. Other players still can vote for your games. I think "auto-vote" ability is necessary because who knows better than the players themselves if their games are interesting or not ? If a player vote for a boring game, the other players won't, that's all. What happened last month with game 156 illustrated that quite well. 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. 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. Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-05-29 20:47:01) Big chess The middlegame could be a challenge, particularly if you have no board to test the consequences of your move. And what do you think about an endgame with 12 pawns and 3 rook or 5 knights on each side? What are the values of the pieces? There is much to investigate there. Perhaps I should write a computer program ... (just a joke) Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-29 23:07:25) Value of the pieces... That's exactly what I was thinking about before allowing you to exchange your bishop against two pawns... Actually, I've no idea about it :) 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. David Grosdemange (2006-05-30 00:28:03) particularities of big chess ^^ we must take care about the possible endings ^^ for instance , knight+bishop can't win in big chess ^^ whereas 2 bishops (opposite coloured) still can win ^^ about a value , i think something like : pawn : 1 knight : 2,5 bishop : 4 rook : 6 queen : 11 Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-30 00:53:26) Big chess, theory Hmm... Interesting ! What about 4 bishops (same color) ? ^^ I think it's really quantum... The relative values may change incredibly according to the position (especially exchanges) and game progress... David Grosdemange (2006-05-30 00:57:56) like in normal chess ... the value are in general ... they depend on the position , like in normal chess . but here , the "pair of bishop" has another dimension ^^ Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-31 15:34:58) Including games into webpages Hello to all. I've added a small feature : it's an adaptable viewer that enables to include a game into a webpage (ie. with frame). You can easily change text, board & background color, display pgn or not... See the Help section (bottom) - http://www.ficgs.com/help.html Lionel Vidal (2006-05-31 19:33:20) Go komi / Rules Hello to all, As a brand user FICGS user, I first read the rules (of course!), and I am wondering about the komi value of half a point. AFAIK it is not very common, unlike, say, 5.5. Is there a specific reason for such a komi value? Best wishes, Lionel Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 04:10:56) Komi, pass, area scoring, ko, seki.... Ok... I'll bring answers and modifications to the rules for all points that remain blurred, today and tomorrow ! The counting method will be Area Scoring (chinese scoring) : When alternate play has ended, each player's score is the number of his stones on the board plus the number of empty intersections surrounded only by his stones. Now I have a question from a beginner (me) : Is it possible, even with a non entire number komi (ie. 0.5 or 5.5), to have a draw situation ? In other words, what happens if a game can't finish because in example ko rule can't apply ?! Thanks a lot for your help. 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') ? Lionel Vidal (2006-06-02 16:28:11) Go rules It's me again :-) What is the point of the special cases you chose? Why not simply follow the chinese rule? I reread it yesterday and compared to what you say: - reappearance of the same board position is forbidden (note that should be easy to check by computer with hash keys associated to positions) - Seki is not really a special case in chinese rule (it is only in territory scoring): you count stones and enclosed vacant points; others vacant points are share equally. - Winner is determined by comparing one's score to 180 1/2 (half number of points of the board). - Komi: 2 3/4 points are deducted from black's score and added to white's. - After both sides have agreed to end the game (that is after a double pass), if any unsettled positions remain on the board, both sides' stones are treated as alive (that is neat and solve most drawing problems) - Basically a player that makes an illegal move loses his turn (i.e. in effect passes): that includes repeating the same position (why should white win in such a case?). That sounds much cleaner IMO. The only possible draw may be some very complex round robin kos, where the position keeps changing, but I guess we can forget it (and it should eventually been resoved by double pass anyway, even if one side is unhappy: see the preceding neat point). BTW you can probably find the full text on the Web (I have only a paper version from the 1988 official rules of Chinese Weiqi Association). Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-02 20:39:25) FICGS : Chinese rules ! You convinced me :) (sorry, I didn't understand well some concepts before) Good news : I have implemented the non-repetition rules with hash keys... Now the rules are exactly CHINESE RULES with a 6.5 komi, which is the value which tends to be used in tournaments. Thank you Lionel :-) Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-07 12:13:32) Countries tournament Another solution consists in naming the teams in another way, of course... So, any player could enter any team. (only depending on the leader) Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-13 18:28:54) FICGS chess world championship 1 & 2 Hello to all. FICGS chess world championship deadline (2006 june 15) is 2 days far from now ! Here is the scheme, allowing all players who registered to start playing at the same time, without loosing the opportunity for new players to register at a later date : As 2300+ players will enter the cycle at stage 2, the idea is to start 1st (from stage 2) and 2nd (from stage 1) world championship at the same time. Thus, all tournaments will begin at the fixed date for all players who already registered, then a new deadline will be fixed (probably in august/september), and all players registering late for chess wch would begin a tournament each time there's enough new players in the waiting list, with the condition that the ELO average of these new tournaments be equal or superior (as few as possible) to the tournaments that began on June 15. And good luck to all... :) David Grosdemange (2006-06-16 08:44:57) grrrrrrrr au départ le championnat devait démarrer le 15 avec certaines règles , et au final il démarre plus tard avec d'autres règles ........ Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-06-16 11:35:05) Elo rating calculation Hello Thibault! How are provisional ratings are treated? Two notes to the rules: 1. You write: "Bonus is given by the Percentage (100 * Points / Games) obtained" and "If the percentage is negative, ..." Percentage cannot be negative. I think you mean: If percentage < 50 2. You write "Please note that Bonus is limited to 470 points". Why do you write other values for 96-99 % in the Bonus-Table? 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) Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-16 19:24:41) Retard et explications Bonjour Pablo. La règle de la qualification au 2ème tour des joueurs 2300+ ne date pas d'hier, et j'avais annoncé une mise à jour des règles. Les discussions n'arrivant souvent également qu'au dernier moment, je dirais seulement : Mieux vaut tard que jamais :) .. mieux vaut changer des règles non-optimisées avant le début des tournois qu'entre deux cycles... Je le répète, les règles changeront tant qu'elles pourront être améliorées significativement (comme partout ailleurs). Il me faut un peu de temps pour adapter et trouver de nouvelles dénominations pour les tournois (notamment celui qui permettra aux joueurs classés 2300+ de jouer avant l'heure). Le plus important reste que le championnat attire les joueurs ayant un classement élevé comme moins élevé. Dans les règles originales, de nombreux joueurs n'auraient pas pu jouer tout de suite. Un retard reste un retard, certes... Désolé pour cela, mais je pense que ça en vaut la peine. Wayne Lowrance (2006-06-17 07:36:58) rating calc Welp, I am another innocent victim of starting off at 1400. When I signed on I wanted to start at the beginning, much like daniel. what I really did not pay attention to is the difficulty in climbing the ladder. My chess rating on other sites including CC cite is well over 2200. I started there at the bottom and figured I would do the same here. Not so fast. I have won one tourney here weith 6/6 score tourney allready and am have a perfect scored in a second one with 3 games to go. and yet my expected rating is listed at 1805, cleary I am not a 1800 player. It is not my fault that I was forced to play in a tourney dominated by 1400 players. What you think. Not trying to cause trouble, just venting I guess. and the cite is nice, will continue playing, my best toya Wayne p.s. do you think my playing in a 1400 tourney is fair to those players, hummm? 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 (2006-06-20 16:05:08) Sicilian opening & Kasparov I quote from Amir analysis : "But if you want to win, the Sicilian is really the best choice." I fully agree, I'll just add: but Sveshnikov sicilian :) Actually, (not a surprise) you just have to see how Black pieces are conducted by Garry Kasparov in sicilian opening to understand what lines to follow, why it is the best choice... and why he became the best player of all times. He simply always wanted to win, never draw... It is an illustration of a quote in this interesting (but failed) movie by Guy Ritchie, "Revolver" : "To win against a weaker opponent, you have to extend the game field." Finally, it's the exact opposite of what Bobby Fischer said : "I don't believe in psychology, I believe in good moves". That's not enough IMO, chess openings are a psychologic battle that reflect the state of mind and will. It often decides in a way the result of the game, not by moves, but by the intention. 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 (2006-06-23 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 (2006-06-23 13:16:42) Source A very interesting article. BLINDFOLD CHESS. (PART I) by Anonymous From Chambers' Journal This article is from the journal LITTELL'S LIVING AGE (Third Series, Volume XVI, January, February, March, 1862), which is in the public domain. Content by Chess Samizdat http://www.correspondencechess.com/syndication/articles/0050.htm 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 :) Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 12:02:45) triche et fair-play Bonjour Henri-Louis. Encore une fois cela fait partie intégrante du jeu par correspondance... Il n'est pas rare que les joueurs "gèrent" leurs défaites et victoires dans le temps pour les faire coincider avec les calculs de classement de leur choix. Le problème est identique à l'ICCF et ailleurs, et il n'y a aucune solution ou règle raisonnable pouvant régler le problème. Lorsqu'on a compris que le jeu par correspondance est une question de plusieurs mois, on finit par comprendre que le problème est somme toute négligeable... De nombreuses parties jouées sur le serveur sont jouées beaucoup plus rapidement qu'à la normale, cela n'empêche qu'il s'agit d'échecs par correspondance, avec la cadence du jeu par correspondance. Diminuer le temps par coup ne changerait absolument pas le problème si tu y réfléchis bien. Quoiqu'il en soit, concernant la partie dont tu avais fait appel, qu'elle se termine maintenant ou fin aout, ça ne change rien, elle sera prise en compte dans le classement de septembre. Pour finir, je rappelle qu'il existe une cadence "rapide" (tournois rapides, championnat), c'est donc le choix de chacun. Patience :) Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 18:26:07) Chess game is a draw... I understand what you mean... But this is theory. I can't see any pratical example illustrating a real problem with "symmetrical games"... Do you know such an example that happened in ICCF before. 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 ;) Gino Figlio (2006-07-04 20:36:39) Symmetrical games Dear Thibault, I respect your opinion about the ability of a referee being able to detect who has cheated and when, but I don't share it. That is the main reason why I am planning to avoid these situations, when a third party's opinion(very valuable of course but still not error-free) will decide the outcome of a game. Gino Figlio (2006-07-04 21:19:14) |