Skybird
08-31-08, 05:50 PM
"As you see I pick your idea, J., and set it up!" :know:
-----
The old hands around do remember, the newcomers have not been here long enough to know:
Early 2006, we had a series of chess matches that had been held in public on this board, in correspondence chess fashion. Use the search-button and enter "chessmatch", which will give you the threads.
I of course especially remember my two matches with Scandium, who meanwhile went missing, because the matches were complex and challenging, and characterized by plenty of funny trash-talking.
I wonder if there is any interest to revive the idea and launch another couple of duels? I again would volunteer to provide position diagrams, if players do not have according software themselves. that way it is easier for the audience to follow.
rules would be like back then: books and theory help is allowed, but by code of honour (we cannot control it) computer assistance for calculating moves is banned (different to correspondence chess where it is not regulated, but what is the use in letting our chess programs play against each as long as it is not a dedicated thread for public discussion?). Software to log moves and create position diagrams is allowed. for those not having seen the first matches, check the old threads via search-button, they are still there. Match and Rematch is enocuraged, we also could play all matches simultaneously, as is common standard in correspondence chess, if people agree . I recommend to use a standard as orientation to have at least 40 moves in 30 days, which, as far as I remember, also is the norm in corresp. chess (or was it 30 in 30?) . Full notation and repeating the last move of the opponent before answering with one'S own is encouraged, to prevent mistakes. Comments of the audience are okay as long as they do not actoveoly support any of the player with move suggestions. Analysis of past situations during the match is okay if not affecting current and future chances of players. we want communication and humour, and no silent, bitterly serious club.
Well...?
-----
The old hands around do remember, the newcomers have not been here long enough to know:
Early 2006, we had a series of chess matches that had been held in public on this board, in correspondence chess fashion. Use the search-button and enter "chessmatch", which will give you the threads.
I of course especially remember my two matches with Scandium, who meanwhile went missing, because the matches were complex and challenging, and characterized by plenty of funny trash-talking.
I wonder if there is any interest to revive the idea and launch another couple of duels? I again would volunteer to provide position diagrams, if players do not have according software themselves. that way it is easier for the audience to follow.
rules would be like back then: books and theory help is allowed, but by code of honour (we cannot control it) computer assistance for calculating moves is banned (different to correspondence chess where it is not regulated, but what is the use in letting our chess programs play against each as long as it is not a dedicated thread for public discussion?). Software to log moves and create position diagrams is allowed. for those not having seen the first matches, check the old threads via search-button, they are still there. Match and Rematch is enocuraged, we also could play all matches simultaneously, as is common standard in correspondence chess, if people agree . I recommend to use a standard as orientation to have at least 40 moves in 30 days, which, as far as I remember, also is the norm in corresp. chess (or was it 30 in 30?) . Full notation and repeating the last move of the opponent before answering with one'S own is encouraged, to prevent mistakes. Comments of the audience are okay as long as they do not actoveoly support any of the player with move suggestions. Analysis of past situations during the match is okay if not affecting current and future chances of players. we want communication and humour, and no silent, bitterly serious club.
Well...?