![[sa]](/mwf/v12/flags/sa.png "Saudi Arabia")
agree
well,now we must wait to the other players of your team to agree natmaku
sorry guys, i have some priorities right now so im withdrawing from the team. Anyways, good luck to all of you.
ok natmaku,but please,also send private messages to all the other members of you teams,so they will be able to start looking for other player
![[gb]](/mwf/v12/flags/gb.png "United Kingdom")
2 games will be plenty.
Suggest you list players in each team.
Next you and Uly decide who will play white in first game,i couldn't care less.
Then we can get in contact with our teams and start making decisions.
Suggest you list players in each team.
Next you and Uly decide who will play white in first game,i couldn't care less.
Then we can get in contact with our teams and start making decisions.
ok,i will list players
about what colour we will play first,i really dont mind,since we are going to play 2 games,but i also need confirmation of our team about that
p.s.if we tie the match,and also we decide to play one more game,we can just use a random generator to choose what team will play white again
about what colour we will play first,i really dont mind,since we are going to play 2 games,but i also need confirmation of our team about that
p.s.if we tie the match,and also we decide to play one more game,we can just use a random generator to choose what team will play white again
![[mx]](/mwf/v12/flags/mx.png "Mexico")
Hi,
Having just got the link to this thread and it seems put in the team without knowing lmao (I dont mind) my first thought was hmmmn another draw but I then had an idea and phoned Paul (NATIONAL12) to get his thoughts and he seems open to the idea which maybe just maybe bring a positive result one way or another.
The idea is simply each player has to make a move of his own WITHOUT consultation with other members of his team (I like to think we are all honest enough to do this lol) ...... Each player is given a number 1,2,3 or 4 (the team decide on this) and then player 1 will play the first move and then player 2 makes the second move etc etc ... It may cause of lot of pulling ones hair out but that is partly the idea after all we all have our fav openings and then fav lines etc and we will all be at the mercy to some extent of what our team mates play and of course someone might have a great idea BUT a team mate may not see it.
Anyway any thoughts on the matter?
Regards
Tony
Having just got the link to this thread and it seems put in the team without knowing lmao (I dont mind) my first thought was hmmmn another draw but I then had an idea and phoned Paul (NATIONAL12) to get his thoughts and he seems open to the idea which maybe just maybe bring a positive result one way or another.
The idea is simply each player has to make a move of his own WITHOUT consultation with other members of his team (I like to think we are all honest enough to do this lol) ...... Each player is given a number 1,2,3 or 4 (the team decide on this) and then player 1 will play the first move and then player 2 makes the second move etc etc ... It may cause of lot of pulling ones hair out but that is partly the idea after all we all have our fav openings and then fav lines etc and we will all be at the mercy to some extent of what our team mates play and of course someone might have a great idea BUT a team mate may not see it.
Anyway any thoughts on the matter?
Regards
Tony
Hi Tony,
I must say i do like this idea.
Regards,
Mark.
I must say i do like this idea.
Regards,
Mark.
You could make it even more interesting by using 4 engines and for each move each engine is rotated between the players. each team picks 4 engines at the start.
Well that is another option. I will let the others decide.
![[us]](/mwf/v12/flags/us.png "United States")
Houdini, Rybka, Fire, and IvanHoe. 
I'd pick Critter 1.4 over any of them.
It has already been done, as 2 players Vs. 2 players, it was called Relay Chess:
Relay Chess: H1N1 Junkies Vs. NATIONAL12 & Vempele 1/2-1/2
Relay Chess 2: Vempele & NATIONAL12 Vs. H1N1 Junkies 1/2-1/2
Other than games ending in draws anyway, the concept works.
Relay Chess has the cool feature of allowing 4 Simultaneous games in where a player is never required to play in more than one board at a time as long as the games remain synchronized. It would look like this (no randomization yet, just an example):
Move one:
Board 1: White move made by BigBen - Black move made by Barnard
Board 2: White move made by Keoki - Black move made by NATIONAL12
Board 3: White move made by turbojuice1122 - Black move made by Mark
Board 4: White move made by ppipper - Black move made by Uly
Despite being 4 simultaneous games, no extra strain is put in the players as they are only asked to make 1 move in one board (same effort of a single game)
Move two:
Board 1: White's second move made by NATIONAL12 - Black's second move made by Keoki
Board 2: White's second move made by Mark - Black's second move made by turbojuice1122
Board 3: White's second move made by Uly- Black's second move made by ppipper
Board 4: White's second move made by Barnard - Black's second move made by Bigben
Again, each individual player isn't asked to put more time and effort in the move than they'd put on a single game.
The rotation continues like that.
What do you think?
This is not what I had in mind but it could be a lot of fun, and we get to play 4 games in the time we'd play one without extra effort! (because in each game, it is divided by 4) I think that's efficient.
Relay Chess: H1N1 Junkies Vs. NATIONAL12 & Vempele 1/2-1/2
Relay Chess 2: Vempele & NATIONAL12 Vs. H1N1 Junkies 1/2-1/2
Other than games ending in draws anyway, the concept works.
Relay Chess has the cool feature of allowing 4 Simultaneous games in where a player is never required to play in more than one board at a time as long as the games remain synchronized. It would look like this (no randomization yet, just an example):
Move one:
Board 1: White move made by BigBen - Black move made by Barnard
Board 2: White move made by Keoki - Black move made by NATIONAL12
Board 3: White move made by turbojuice1122 - Black move made by Mark
Board 4: White move made by ppipper - Black move made by Uly
Despite being 4 simultaneous games, no extra strain is put in the players as they are only asked to make 1 move in one board (same effort of a single game)
Move two:
Board 1: White's second move made by NATIONAL12 - Black's second move made by Keoki
Board 2: White's second move made by Mark - Black's second move made by turbojuice1122
Board 3: White's second move made by Uly- Black's second move made by ppipper
Board 4: White's second move made by Barnard - Black's second move made by Bigben
Again, each individual player isn't asked to put more time and effort in the move than they'd put on a single game.
The rotation continues like that.
What do you think?
This is not what I had in mind but it could be a lot of fun, and we get to play 4 games in the time we'd play one without extra effort! (because in each game, it is divided by 4) I think that's efficient.
Erm, I just checked and to keep things laced, in board 1 and 3 White moves first, then on, board 1, 2, 3 and 4 the clock starts running for the other team, so that at any point it's always the turn to move of the other team, but the concept is the same.
captain must take decission,and must be who choose the move that must be played,not rotating or making obscure things
apart from that,keoki withdrawed from the team,so we must look for another player
apart from that,keoki withdrawed from the team,so we must look for another player
Oh, I really don't like this idea...I thought it was going to be one game after another, and the team discussing each move. 4 players is enough to vote. It wouldn't be very common to have 4 separate votes, and 2-2 ties are good places to argue until someone changes.
i expect you saw my earlier post on this.One game at a time.
>Board 1: White move made by BigBen - Black move made by Barnard
>Board 2: White move made by Keoki - Black move made by NATIONAL12
>Board 3: White move made by turbojuice1122 - Black move made by Mark
>Board 4: White move made by ppipper - Black move made by Uly
>Despite being 4 simultaneous games, no extra strain is put in the players as they are only asked to make 1 move in one board (same effort of a single game)
>Move two:
>Board 1: White's second move made by NATIONAL12 - Black's second move made by Keoki
>Board 2: White's second move made by Mark - Black's second move made by turbojuice1122
>Board 3: White's second move made by Uly- Black's second move made by ppipper
>Board 4: White's second move made by Barnard - Black's second move made by Bigben
>Again, each individual player isn't asked to put more time and effort in the move than they'd put on a single game.
>The rotation continues like that.
>What do you think?
>This is not what I had in mind but it could be a lot of fun, and we get to play 4 games in the time we'd play one without extra effort! (because in each game, it is divided by 4) I think that's efficient.
Hi Uly,
`EEK` I did not mean 4 games I simply meant for the single game so if I as BigBen made the first move then it would be my move again at move 5 after my 3 other team mates had played their moves ..... Depending if I had a few drinks I could start them pulling their hair out on move 1 by playing h4 hahaha
although what position I will have at move 5 is anyones gues lmao PMSLRegards
Uly gets carried away sometimes.
>Uly gets carried away sometimes
hahaha thats fine we all do that at times
Regards
> `EEK` I did not mean 4 games
But why not? As it is, each player sits out doing nothing 3/4 of the time, instead of doing nothing he could be preparing a move for some other board.
That is, if we played one of these rotation games, and then another, and then another, and finally another, for each player it would take the same effort of playing them simultaneously.
Even if we only played two simultaneous rotation games, 50% of the time players would be sitting out doing nothing!
Anyway, it seems we won't go for this format, but if we were, I'd throw convincing arguments of how it's an efficient usage of resources in where players aren't required to do more than they'd do if they were playing a single game
, did you look at the H1N1 Junkies Vs. NATIONAL12 & Vempele games I linked to? It followed the same concept, and the more players, the more simultaneous games that can be played, without putting extra strain in any player.
Problem is Uly we are asking players in our team who only have limited time available to play chess, to commit themselves to something.Its all very well getting a strong team together but you know that both turbo and BigBen have other commitments in life which are much more important.
Like earning money.
Like earning money.
I see. Well, I went over reading again one of the relay chess matches, it seemed to be a lot of fun but this was my final conclusion about it:
"Besides the novelty and fun, I don't think Relay Chess is practical, on races it makes sense because runners can't add their speed up, so they take turns, but in chess you can share the analysis for an effective add up of strength, relaying is just handicapping."
~Uly
That is, PCS or me could have played better alone than in that format, which means, the two games being PCS Vs. NATIONAL12 and Vempele Vs. Uly (or something) would have been of better quality.
I still hope to have another Relay Chess Match in the future, though with 8 players it seems like overkill, 4 players suffice for such match
"Besides the novelty and fun, I don't think Relay Chess is practical, on races it makes sense because runners can't add their speed up, so they take turns, but in chess you can share the analysis for an effective add up of strength, relaying is just handicapping."
~Uly
That is, PCS or me could have played better alone than in that format, which means, the two games being PCS Vs. NATIONAL12 and Vempele Vs. Uly (or something) would have been of better quality.
I still hope to have another Relay Chess Match in the future, though with 8 players it seems like overkill, 4 players suffice for such match
>you know that both turbo and BigBen have other commitments in life which are much more important
That is certainly true or I would have played in the WBCCC (holiday also go in the way) .... It is easy to leave the computer running but unless I have some input it would be a bore, I hope to get a couple of hours free in the evenings to concentrate
Regards
i dont like the idea Tony,because one person must 'have' the plan (the captain),and choose the better moves,but if each time each player choose one move,easily you wont get the correct plan for the position,and you wont pick up the better moves in the game
is too much better the votation system,or the captain choose the moves,listening the players,of course
is too much better the votation system,or the captain choose the moves,listening the players,of course
As per my original idea,however i am flexible on this matter.
What you say is correct and is why a single top GM usually wins against a team of 3 other GM's.They all have there own plans and they get buggered up.
Saying all this,the game is meant to be fun so maybe you and i have to compromise a bit.
I remember a game a few years ago when Uly was playing alongside Bobby C and Uly had to find correct move for Bobby game plan to work(Uly at that time had a crap 1 cpu computer).Uly found the right move which wasn't that easy.Lots of wiping foreheads all round.
What you say is correct and is why a single top GM usually wins against a team of 3 other GM's.They all have there own plans and they get buggered up.
Saying all this,the game is meant to be fun so maybe you and i have to compromise a bit.
I remember a game a few years ago when Uly was playing alongside Bobby C and Uly had to find correct move for Bobby game plan to work(Uly at that time had a crap 1 cpu computer).Uly found the right move which wasn't that easy.Lots of wiping foreheads all round.
>the game is meant to be fun
of course,we play for fun,not for other thing...but even if we play just for fun,i think we must give our best playing for fun,and play a good and nice chess
about other points,agree with you Paul
> i think we must give our best playing for fun,and play a good and nice chess
This idea of players playing moves individually without communication to other partners still means each player is giving their best to have a fun, good and nice game of chess, when it's their time to move.
It also punishes a team heavily for having a "weak" team member making a poor move every 4 moves, while in a team match, the member suggests a move and it is discarded. The player doesn't have as much responsibility as in Relay chess when it's his time to move he could give away the effort of his partners.
like pointed ppipper,i dont need any special way of playing chess to 'make it better'
so,too much thanks for your,lets say,'interesting' point of view about how we must make and work our team...but please circumscribe to your team and do not want to put your hands on all matters,at least refering to our team
very grateful for your nice ideas,but take care of your team,not our team;we have a captain,and with one captain we have enough,we dont need a second captain who tell us how we must make things
so,too much thanks for your,lets say,'interesting' point of view about how we must make and work our team...but please circumscribe to your team and do not want to put your hands on all matters,at least refering to our team
very grateful for your nice ideas,but take care of your team,not our team;we have a captain,and with one captain we have enough,we dont need a second captain who tell us how we must make things
Oh dear this does not look good for me, as a very weak team player i believe the team should look for someone better.
LOL, that's why I put weak in quotes Mark, I don't think any team here has a weak member
I understand what you are saying and i agree with it.
![[es]](/mwf/v12/flags/es.png "Spain")
All of these ideas seem very exciting to me. However, I must admit Chess is interesting enough as is, I dont need any special way of playing to make it even better. It is my style to play with a plan. Many times one move is the move, because it belongs to a plan of certain moves. It is very difficult to find the best move individually; in such a case I would rely on Rybka almost always.
BigBen was only trying to make the game more interesting for us all.I believe like yourself in a captain however i have very strong personalities in my team and know that turbojuice and BigBen are much stronger otb players than myself.However as i have stated many times centaur chess is a different game altogether.
Lets see what develops.
Lets see what develops.
Well, it seems Barnard will refuse to play anything that is not Vanilla Chess...
Play a mix team match or something similar to what I said below.
i am not against vanilla chess as you put it and reading Jose's posts i take it that this is what he wants.
i am happy with our team and will have fun watching Jose and Barnard argueing about moves.
i am happy with our team and will have fun watching Jose and Barnard argueing about moves.
Yeah, it would be interesting to see that
Yeah, I would have liked to see some spice in the games, but vanilla chess has my full support, I guess we can try that after both games are done (expecting 2 draws)
Yeah, I would have liked to see some spice in the games, but vanilla chess has my full support, I guess we can try that after both games are done (expecting 2 draws
)
Has the other team been confirmed? There has been a lot of interchanged parts.
They're still looking for a Keoki replacement.
If they can't find a replacement soon. I would be willing to anchor for there team.
I'm not sure that would be a good idea.
Why?
I understand wouldn't want a rookie on there team vs your power house. I'll try another time.
I'll try another time.
> I understand wouldn't want a rookie on there team vs your power house.
It's unrelated to rookie status, after all, all dark horses look like rookies, but aren't.
It's because, you being TheHug, shouldn't be allowed to post here. I just got confirmation about this. Also, I'm disappointed that you continued lying when I asked you if you had a second account in the forum
, it gives credibility to the theory that you created this ChessForLife account along the TheHug one in case the latter was banned...
when you will stop annoying us?you were banned until you pay the money you debt,and you are still posting using another accounts?as all the people can see,you are a fraudster,a liar and guy who not only cheated us,even more,a guy who will never change and continues cheating us!
you were banned,so why are you posting with a different account Jimmy Huggins?
you were banned,so why are you posting with a different account Jimmy Huggins?
Have you found yet a replacement for the 4th member?
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill