If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Why would an elite player seek to play sharp, double-edged, risky and provocative moves, once they are out of their Houdini, when the other player might still be in his Houdini?
This is not a "Houdini" problem. This is a paranoia problem and it is not how it goes, even at the top level. Players are pushed into ultra cautiousness by match rules and circumstances, not by Houdinis. In normal circumstances super GMs fight and take chances.
Even before computers the fun was in steering opponents to lines of ECO which contained errors. I did it in CC and feel certain OTB players also did this.
The evaluations at the end of the line was usually correct. The problem was the moves weren't forced and sometimes contained blunders.
Possibly future world championships will also be a game of patience. Mind numbing games waiting for fast playoffs. Short boring draws demonstrating how to dumb down a position.
I have no doubt that had those players been playing a match with an opponent of lesser ability the games would have been much more interesting and decisive.
The better players will always be able to use computers better than the weaker players.
This thread continues to be interesting, and respectful of others' opinions. :)
I do agree that for most of us normal (or below normal) chess players, the standard opening position is still viable. And it always will be. The problem is at the very top. To repeat myself, players are no longer trying to outplay their opponents at the 2700+ level, they are trying to out-Houdini them. And when they come to a point in the game when they are out of their own Houdini, they seek simplification and exchanges for fear that their opponent is still in Houdini. It only makes sense. Why would an elite player seek to play sharp, double-edged, risky and provocative moves, once they are out of their Houdini, when the other player might still be in his Houdini? This would be an almost suicidal way to play chess nowadays. Clearly the fact that computers are the ones finding the vast majority if not all of the opening novelties has changed the game radically, to the point where players will simply not take risks once they are out of Houdini, and understandably so, and this demands, therefore, Fischerandom. The game needs to be taken out of the figurative hands of computers and placed back into literal human hands, and brains. At least at the very elite level of the game.
To answer the point with respect to checkers being solved, this is why the game was changed to add more squares and why certain openings were outlawed from being played. I do not think chess needs to add more squares.
Perhaps the solution is simply to let players decide. When both players are afraid of each other's opening preparation and agree to begin their game from a Fischerandom position, then why not let them do so? But nobody should be forced to play Fischerandom if he/she prefers the initial position in traditional chess.
Is it ever normal circumstances when one player is playing in the match of his lifetime and the other player is playing to keep what he has?
Absolutely! The champion is always trying to keep what he has and the challenger is always playing the match of his life (trying to become the champion). Getting old Gary ? :)
Fischer random chess falls into the category of Fairy Chess. Interesting but not something everyone likes. I can recall Kriegspiel was often played at the chess club. I always liked to see this kind of activity because it kept the members interested and returning the next week.
The ICCF has Chess 960 events (Fischer Random) on their online chess server for those who want it. Anyone can enter via their direct entry as far as I know.
I think that giving the champion draw odds is really unfair. I like Kramnik's suggestion of playing the tie-break before the match starts, this way the actual match will never really be drawn, thus players (at least half the players) will have to try and win.
I also like the idea of playing the tie-break before the match. It certainly makes for an exciting start to a match!
However, it can be argued (successfully I think) that blitz or rapid games have no business playing a role in a World championship match. It is like breaking a tie in a golf tournament with a long drive contest. Instead playing supplementary holes is the normal way to break those ties, but it is the same kind of golf, it is not playing mini-putt.
So once we agree that someone must get draw odd, without resorting to fast games, what is left is giving the champion the odd. Why ? Because he has earned that right the hard way by becoming the champion. It is up to the challenger to prove that he is better, not the other way around.
Fischer random chess falls into the category of Fairy Chess. Interesting but not something everyone likes.
Yes, but let's suppose that Kramnik and Anand faces one another in a tournament game, and both agree to play Fischer Random in this particular game. Would it be wrong to let them do so?
I agree that there should be no tie-break games, either before or after regulation Houdini. You should have to out-Houdini the champion in slow games to take his title.
I do not expect we will see much Fiscerandom played any time time soon. People love to study openings, and often not the rest of the game. Books on openings outsell all other chess books combined by a vast margin. Everyone hopes that games in the world championship matches are within their own repertoire. And there is no question but that standard opening repertoire work was a great part of chess in bygone days. But this is no longer the case. And it will only get worse as more and more top players continue to play Houdini instead of chess. "Duty" to chess is not a factor. If a top player has the choice of a calm move and a plan of simplification and exchanges leading to a likely draw, and a double-edged move leading to a possible slaughter at the hands of Houdini, then unless a win is absolutely necessary, the safer move is going to be played. We will see more and more chess like the recent world championship match because the players will have no other choice.
We are witnessing the death of chess, and this sort of death is inevitable once a computer plays a finite game better than humans do. In fact, in theory even Fischerandom will eventually be ruined by the future Houdinis, but this possibility is hundreds if not thousands of years away. No current human could book up significantly in all of the permutations. With a switch to Fischerandom, players will have to start playing real and full chess games again, instead of simply playing Houdini to be followed by a few drawish chess moves. As chess is currently played, the vast majority of decisive games will be a result of one player out-Houdiniing the opponent, not outplaying him. How exciting!
I agree that there should be no tie-break games, either before or after regulation Houdini. You should have to out-Houdini the champion in slow games to take his title.
I do not expect we will see much Fiscerandom played any time time soon. People love to study openings, and often not the rest of the game. Books on openings outsell all other chess books combined by a vast margin. Everyone hopes that games in the world championship matches are within their own repertoire. And there is no question but that standard opening repertoire work was a great part of chess in bygone days. But this is no longer the case. And it will only get worse as more and more top players continue to play Houdini instead of chess. "Duty" to chess is not a factor. If a top player has the choice of a calm move and a plan of simplification and exchanges leading to a likely draw, and a double-edged move leading to a possible slaughter at the hands of Houdini, then unless a win is absolutely necessary, the safer move is going to be played. We will see more and more chess like the recent world championship match because the players will have no other choice.
We are witnessing the death of chess, and this sort of death is inevitable once a computer plays a finite game better than humans do. In fact, in theory even Fischerandom will eventually be ruined by the future Houdinis, but this possibility is hundreds if not thousands of years away. No current human could book up significantly in all of the permutations. With a switch to Fischerandom, players will have to start playing real and full chess games again, instead of simply playing Houdini to be followed by a few drawish chess moves. As chess is currently played, the vast majority of decisive games will be a result of one player out-Houdiniing the opponent, not outplaying him. How exciting!
"In fact, in theory even Fischerandom will eventually be ruined by the future Houdinis, but this possibility is hundreds if not thousands of years away."
Are you saying that engines like Houdini don't play F.R. very well? I find that hard to believe considering that those engines play pretty damn well when you start at a specific point in many current tournament games. Randomizing the opening simply forces the engines to abandon the opening book (as it would so oblige a human) and then the pure calculation advantage sets in.
No, I mean to suggest that even though Houdini will certainly play Fischerandom just as well as it does standard chess, humans will not be able to remember all the permutations and analysis, there are too many for one mind to absorb in one lifetime.
Yes, but let's suppose that Kramnik and Anand faces one another in a tournament game, and both agree to play Fischer Random in this particular game. Would it be wrong to let them do so?
Since it's FIDE rated, the laws of chess must be followed. With an arbiter who is enforcing the rules here is what would happen from the FIDE handbook.
Article 7: Irregularities
7.1
a. If during a game it is found that the initial position of the pieces was incorrect, the game shall be cancelled and a new game played.
b. If during a game it is found that the chessboard has been placed contrary to Article 2.1, the game continues but the position reached must be transferred to a correctly placed chessboard.
No, I mean to suggest that even though Houdini will certainly play Fischerandom just as well as it does standard chess, humans will not be able to remember all the permutations and analysis, there are too many for one mind to absorb in one lifetime.
As long as players insist on playing the same couple of openings with white and the same couple of defenses with black, it will be easy for an opponent to prepare. The solution is not to embrace Fairy chess. It's for the players to broaden their repetoire in regular chess.
Tweet
Comment