Yes. Why not open a tournament list? Rules like this:

* No chess board computers, handhelds, PC chess programs that calculate moves of their own
* Books and databases (f.e. chessbase) are legal, analysis in internet as well
* No third persons getting involved
* No strict timetables (many people here do live a non-virtual life in the real world and thus sometimes may not be present for one or two days)
* The winner receives subsim.com's honour medal in 24 karat gold, donated by Mr. Stevens. He also earns the right to be called "Sir".
* If the latter gentleman wins himself, we'll buy him a big donut with an extra portion of marmelade. He also earns the right to be called "Old Chap".
* Loosers will be called "Loosers", now and forever.
* Bystanders not participating in a match may use PC software to create position diagrams every couple of moves and post them in the according thread, and the precise location, of course.
* Every match is run in it's own thread.
* Every such thread will be made a sticky.
* Comments by others are allowed in that thread as long as they do not recommend moves, give warnings or otherwise influence the match. No Kortschnoi-Karpov-Symptoms, please.
* Several matches could be held simultaneously.
* We could hold computer-computer matches as well, with old board computer. These have the charm that 20 years back human plyers at least were able to follow such matches and figure out why the computers did what they did (has become a bit difficult with latest highend-killer-software :lol: )


Interested? Sign in here. So far it is

- Kiwi, and
- Skybird.

As far as a boardcomputer match is concerned, I could throw a Chess Challenger Voice, a CC Sensory 8 and 9, a Mephisto II, a Mephisto M-IV+HG220, a Kasparov Travel Champion 2200 (my strongest board computer), a Mephisto Maestro Travel and a Chess super System III into the competition. I also have a Fidelity Avantgarde (my most expensive piece of hardware), a Novag super constellation and a Sargon 2.5 ARB (please everbody turn white in envy!), but these three unfortunately currently are inoperative, attempts to repair them failed for reasons of electronical parts that are not available. Opponentns in this category should be judged manually concerning their playing strength, and manual levelling of playing levels.

Hm. Now that I think of it the most expensive computers broke the earliest, the cheapest devices held the longest time... :stare:

I leave out PC software, doesn't hold much interest, I think.

I am interested as well. Are we running brackets, elimination or a Swiss-style tournament?

I really like chess so when this thread came up I have been looking at all the possibilites...I have found one which is probably maybe our best option...no download required or even to register you can just type in like G or something...at

http://www.freechess.org/javaboard/index.html

but I found this one today which I think is awesome really....It has the option to purchase it for like $749bucks ..which really just blew me away..you gotta go look at it...you can see your opponent on his/her web cam with sound while you play...great ideas....

http://www.solid-thinking.com/games/...chess_room.asp

Anyone up for a game to test this one out?....I hang out in the lobby there and see if anyone shows up...:)

Freechess is all a chessplayer needs together with winboard. Highly addictive place once you start to play there... just one more blitz... :|\ My handle is Kajus.

Cheers Porphy

Sign me up as well.

But please bear over with me when it comes to match scheduling, I'm a busy man at times.

Do we have to use a program for play, or can we just keep a board at home and log the moves the old fashioned way? (ie Nf3) My preference is for the latter. I always concieved chess as an inherently organic game.

I vote for the old-fashioned way as well. Have no intention to play the whole match in one run. For that I could go straigth to any chess-webpage, there are several. A match running over several days or one or two weeks is what I am looking for, personally. Visiting the forum as usually, at that opportunity checking what kind of trouble my partner has intentions to bring me into, and after having logged out again playing it out on my chessboard. Next time I visit this place I'll make my move, and so it goes on. Correspondence chess.

But those who prefer the quick match can meet in the according chatrooms, or do it here as well, why not? I must not always have my will :)

I'll be back tomorrow evening. If you start matches meanwhile, don't forget to make each of them a separate thread. Movement notification for two matches in one thread - may be confusing...

Okay, the first match has started, me and Scandium.

I realize that some people voicing interest prefer dedicated chess-webpages to play it in one rush. Okay, but I personally will not follow that example.

However, Takeda seems to see it differently, and about Kiwi and Type23 I am not sure. Maybe you start your own thread(s) with a match parallel to mine and Scandium's?

Iceman and Porphy seem to prefer to meet in a dedicated chessroom. If they change their minds, they will let us know, I'm sure.

Bump it to add that I've been playing online (mainly on the Free Internet Chess Server using the same username I use here) since '95 due to a shortage of "over the board" opponents where I've lived. In that time I've played over 5,000 blitz games, many slower games, and dabbled in some of variants and found that online cheating, at least on the server I play on, is extremely rare.

I've also done some tournament directing and related work with one of the online chess leagues that runs regular tournaments on FICS and ICC where games are scrupulously examined for cheating.

All in all, in this whole online experience I know of only a few confirmed cases and a few more suspected cases, where computer assistance was used.

The reality on the better servers, and I'd imagine it'd be the same on a forum like this one, is that the vast majority of people don't use computer assistance. Really there is no benefit because there's no satisfaction that you gain winning on your own, or insighs gained from the playing experience combined with any post-game discussion and analysis that can show where your thinking was 'right' and where it went wrong.

I think there's room here for a chess forum as with so many members and such a good atmosphere this is an ideal host, plus many of the sims we play are not so different from chess and the two attract a lot of the same players.

Lastly: I generally agree with what skybird suggested and would summarize (adding my own thoughts) that a good format for such a forum should contain:

- Stickies outlining the general rules of play as adopted for a forum format like this along with some useful links to online resources where you can learn more about the game.

- I think stickying the games themselves, at least the ones in progress, is probably a good idea too as it would show at a glance what's on the go and make it easier to observe live games.

- Computer engine assistance (analysis, hints, etc) should be forbidden however the usage of books and/or databases should be upto the players themselves provided both parties agree on this in advance (these are commonly allowed in correspondence and email chess, as pointed out by skybird).

- Players should also stipulate any time restrictions they are under before the game commences, otherwise I think it should be assumed that the rate will generally be at 1 or more moves per day/every other day, where possible, but at times may only be a move every two or three days as other RL tasks intrude and/or a position becomes complex. If one player is prevented somehow from making a move for a period of more than 7 days then the opponent should be notified at the earliest opportunity with an idea of when play may begin again.

- Also second skybird's thoughts that outside commentary should be welcome provided that no comments are made on the position itself while the game is in progress, and no hints, suggestions, or advice given to either player.

- An accepted notation (algebraic being most common these days) should be used to record the moves with the optional use of diagrams illustrating the position encouraged but not mandatory.

That's a pretty basic framework but about all that I think is necessary for a successful chess forum, should we be granted one. I'd add to that that the possible success of such a forum shouldn't be judged solely on how active it is in a non chess labeled forum like General Topics. I'd wager the chess players on the forums number at least into the hundreds but that only a few of them visit General Topics with any regularity.

Long post but wanted to finally add my own thoughts in this thread.

Works for me.

when excluding chip-mates we already are more strict than the set of rules for correspondence chess. We cannot control it, but at least declare it a question of honour not to use active computer-assistance, means: recommended moves, abstract position evaluations.

However, the use of literature should be accepted, since it always has been used in correspondence chess, and is considered to be forming the higher educational value of corr. chess. You can learn a lot that way. I personally do not use a computer-based data-base, but would not object to anyone who does. It is very much the same like literature, only with another method of finding the stuff you need. In books you need to do the search yourself. this is with regard to openings for the main.

In Correspondence chess moves would also be encoded differently, they use numbers only, no letters, a1 becomes 11, and h8 turns into 88. That way, the sequence 1. e4/c5 2. Sf3/Sc6 would translate into 5254 3735 7163 2836.

Has any of you guys every used things like these? :lol:

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/4545/img07140xd.jpg

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/2246/img07159vx.jpg

My God, that match protocol must be close to 30 years old :lol:

I agree, though when it comes to literature/databases some players may not possess any and be turned off if they don't have the option of declaring it off limits in their game.

In my case I have, like you (and probably most other experienced players, an extensive chess database that I have used in e-mail games (where it was permitted) - at least during the opening phase of the game (they become less useful the farther into the game you progressed). I stopped short of computer assistance, even where permitted, and would declare at the outset that I would not use it - and my opponents generally shared my feelings.

I also have a small library of chess literature (about 25 books) covering all phases of the game as well as some of the better known game collections (like the Zurich International chess tournament of '53) and could probably make some decently informed recommendations to anyone who wants to explore this somewhat arcane subject but has no idea on what books to consider.

The PC-software by chessbase, botht he chess programs and the database, come with immense databses of several hundred thousand matches of the last years, and classical ones. However, I always was turned off by using that. Maybe I am a fossile.

I have a substantial collection of chessbooks, the former GDR publisher Sportverlag had a very good collection of chessbooks until the 80s, and a good encyclopedia of chess openings, of which I own around a dozen books on those themes that I used to play in that time. I make use of that, and consider it to be okay, since it is work nevertheless and is allowed in correspondence chess as well (maybe even expected :) ). Despite that, a small number of books on strategy and tactics (of which I do not remmber too much anymore :( ) , and a basic collection of books on principles of endgames. Like so many players, I always disliked endgames, and enver was really strong in that. The ammount of moves one calculates in advance here is a bit beyond my abilities, and I also have no good eye for typical strategic position layouts in endgames. I had several books on chess computers, but somehow I lost them during one of my movements between cities.

I have chessbase, but not Fritz. Chessbase is probably the best datbase program out there and they continue to expand its usefulness with things like e-book opening books in chessbase format, etc.

I think the last chess engine I ever bought was an early version of Chessmaster (for Windows 3.1) back before I started playing online. I definitely prefer human opponents - computers are too precise and lack the same creativity.

I own rather fewer opening books (a handful) but more of the middlegame stuff on strategy, tactics, etc (the bulk of my chess book collection). I agree that endgame books are harder to read and its the hardest part of the game to play as well. I have 3 slim endgame books and actually managed to plow through one of them once upon a time (the most basic of the three). Its something I keep meaning to come back to, or at least pawn and rook + pawn(s) endings. Meh, one of these days :)

Wish I had one :up:

you mean when I survive the opening you will catch me in the middle part , then? :)


Sixpack,

I had several albums like this, additonally to chess club and school team I played several corresp. chess tournaments during school age and some years beyond, before leaving for university, which brought all my chess playing to a halt for over ten years. I suffered severely from that and never was able to get back to the former playing level of mine - which really makes me sad nowadays, but I'm a little bit too late now, it seems.

Well I would not really fear that if I were you - owning them and having read and digested them all are two separate things ;-) Actually, up until your challenge in this thread rekindled my interest I had been inactive for almost exactly a year and had not looked at a chess board at all. However the interest flared back up pretty quickly and I logged into my online account the same day and played a couple dozen blitz games (discovering in the process just how rusty I am... though that'll pass... I hope :)).

I've had over the years a bit of a mentor, interestingly a countryman of yours, who's only in the last couple years decided (at the tender age of forty-something) to give tournament chess a go and he's really into that now as well (though still plays online too). Like me he's always been an on again/off again player - I usually play fairly intensely for a year or two then take a 3-6 month break... this past one year break was my longest but that was following two years of steady online play that included involvement in online tournaments and such (so I needed a longer break when the time came ;)).