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.
I should also mention that this proposal of mine is NOT PART of the new venture that we will be rolling out in 2013. It doesn't need to be. Draws will not be a problem in that venture, but for very different reasons.
Ohhhh...
You mean that everything you recently wrote about draws and piece dropping is NOT part of this new game you invented... it is an attempt to change CHESS rules? Then you should contact FIDE rather than waste your time here, because they are the ones to be convinced.
You mean that everything you recently wrote about draws and piece dropping is NOT part of this new game you invented... it is an attempt to change CHESS rules? Then you should contact FIDE rather than waste your time here, because they are the ones to be convinced.
Correct, Louis. That's why the title of this thread is "Making Draws in Chess Very Rare". However, I have no delusions that posting here will convince anyone of anything. I posted it knowing full well the response I would get, but I can sleep at night knowing that I tried to help these poor lost souls whose minds are so limited (even the ones with high chess ratings). I mean, they do keep crying out for help. They whine and bemoan their poor financial state constantly. WHAAAA! WE NEED MORE MONEY IN CHESS! Some of them seem actually proud of that state as if it demonstrates that they remain on the pure and narrow path. But as they stagnate, and conditions fail to improve, the herd keeps getting thinned out.
I see Gordon Ritchie just celebrated that he can ignore my postings. The same Gordon Ritchie who recently posted:
Isn't it amazing? There is just a total breakdown here, it is almost psychopathic.
The typical closed-minded response and the talk of "ignore list" only makes me chuckle and realize again that chess, and especially chess in Canada, gets what it deserves... year after year after year...
I can chuckle because I also realize that everything that goes on in the Canadian chess world is just a tempest in a teapot.
Apparently, according to the link Kerry Liles provided in this thread, Susan Polgar has already sent FIDE a proposal to reduce draws. But hers doesn't include any rule changes to chess itself, and she thinks draws by 3-time repetition should not be avoided. In other words, it's a watered-down attempt to make some change that may or may not make some difference, but not the major difference that is needed.
I'm not saying my proposal is foolproof and guaranteed to help chess. Only that it has more potential than any other proposal to reduce draws that I have heard of. It would still, like any new idea, require testing and analysis.
There are big plans afoot for my venture in 2013. These new rules could be added, but won't be necessary because there is a whole other mechanism to avoid draws, and any draws that do happen will have a whole different result than in chess.
Perhaps once my idea is out there and doing well, we can talk again and discuss some partnership with the FQE in holding tournaments. But when we began this discussion, I did not know you were even involved with the FQE and I was not thinking along those lines. It is refreshing to have someone willing to discuss an idea on its own merits, rather than just jump to conclusions like "That's absurd!" which was how one individual responded who probably has played more than a few castling moves or en passant captures or pawn promotions in his life.
These debates about chess being a game or a sport... could it be a disease?
No matter -- life goes on. People with vision will continue to change the world, and those without will follow.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I'm not sure I agree with Gordon's apparent view, given in a link in Paul's last post, that chess seems inevitably unable to present itself well enough on television. Given a large enough budget, I imagine there's all kinds of presentation gimmicks and untried types of commentary waiting to be tried. Perhaps even for attempts to present chess on TV in Russia, not enough imagination was used, if an adequate budget for presentation was on offer.
The problem may be that not enough of the populace at the moment, say in North America, is adequately educated about how to play chess reasonably well. Hence someone channel surfing might typically flip past a chess show without giving it much of a chance.
Chess is not nearly as simple a game (at least superficially) as Poker, although that game still has far less of a following worldwide than chess (though the reverse is somewhat true in North America); this can be confirmed by doing a web search. Attempts to change the standard rules of chess, without dumbing it down, may well confront the same problem of a relatively uneducated populace as far as it is concerned, regardless of how infrequent draws might become.
Trying doubly hard to get chess taught widely in schools and elsewhere in North America is probably the way to go, as far as making the game more popular here.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Trying doubly hard to get chess taught widely in schools and elsewhere in North America is probably the way to go, as far as making the game more popular here.
How about just "trying differently" ? For example, who in Canada has thought about contacting the Kasparov Chess Foundation to see how it could help promote chess in the education system in Canada ? Extracurricular activities in schools count for very little. Once categorized into "extracurricular" chess reaches a dead end. We must move well beyond that.
This is exactly what a troll would say. I brought up these people to disprove your theory that a 1700 rated chess player can't possibly have any good ideas for chess, by showing that college dropouts can still create some of the world's greatest visions and ideas.
With egg on your face, you come back with me comparing myself to them. So predictable, these ad hominen attacks. It's all been done before, Jordan, and all you show is what an amateur debater (and a troll) you are. If this were a debating reality show, you'd have been shipped home the first day.
You just can't stand the fact that I made you look silly. Let those with eyes to see, see.
Bahahahahahahahahahahaha !!!!!!!!
Holy Crap, you're funny... And full of yourself.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Fine, it's a hybrid of chess and crazyhouse, and it's absurd. No one will ever buy into it. Keep wasting your time, I'll be there to pat you on the back and say "I told you so" when you realize that you're chasing rainbows.
Until then, enjoy wasting your time in your own, I'm bowing out of this ridiculous thread.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
I doubt the government here would be considering increases in Education spending. The government spent the money on things like cancelled electric power stations, e-health, the Ornge air ambulance system, green power and so forth.
OK, I dispute your claim. We don't have 8 pieces tablebases to study the situation described above but... we do have 6 pieces tablebases. Just try this:
White to move: king on e3, pawn on f4
Black: king on e6, pawn on f5
Now you can try whatever piece dropping you want for white, but black can ALWAYS drop a queen to secure a draw. I tried, just as an example, to drop a queen on d4, threatening to win the black pawn by Qe5+. Guess what? If you drop a black queen on ANY square where it is not threatened by white (careful with g8 and h6!) then you have a draw with white to move.
Basically, this example shows that it is almost impossible to change the outcome of the game with your variant. Some endgames are really that drawish... And the point is that there's hundreds of these positions where adding one piece on each side changes absolutely nothing, even with perfect play.
So your variant is, at best, a huge waste of our time...
Mathieu
Using the link Mathieu has provided to 6-piece Nalimov Endgame Tablebases,
I created an example where you can see how the slight change of position of just one piece can entirely change the perfect-play result. If you go to the above site, you can copy and paste these FEN position strings in to get the diagrams and the Tablebase assessment:
Position 1:
8/3nn3/4k3/8/8/5KB1/6B1/8 w - - 0 1
In standard chess, this starting position is won by White with perfect play. According to the endgame tablebases, it will take White 70 moves (beginning with Bg2-h3) to win it (note: Black responding Ke6-d5 is actually better than Black responding with Ne7-f5! It prolongs the game by 1 extra move, with perfect play).
Position 2:
8/3nn3/4k3/8/8/5K2/5BB1/8 w - - 0 1
In standard chess, this starting position is drawn with perfect play.
It is very possible that White might miss the forced win in Position 1 and, just based on the "equality" of the material, might agree to a draw. Maybe they took 60 or 70 moves to reach Position 1 and White is too tired to see the forced win, just based on the change in position of his dark-square Bishop (which allows the Black King to get to d6 in response to the check from Bh3).
However, in either of these positions, under my proposed rule changes: depending on when the last capture move was made, there will be N remaining moves until the 20 Move Rule is triggered, where 0 <= N <= 20. The 20 Move Rule is like standard chess' 50 Move Rule, except it triggers the player on the move (after 20 non-capture non-pawn moves have been made) to resurrect any captured piece, and then the opponent can do the same.
In Position 1, White playing Bg2-h3 is guaranteed to produce a capture on White's next move or the move after that. But according to the tablebases, with perfect play it will take White either 68 or 69 more moves to win. White may instead prefer NOT to capture at all, but only if the 20 Move Rule is timed such that White gets to place a Queen first, because generally speaking, placing (and then moving) the Queen first will be an advantage and most likely a winning one. Let's call this "having 20 Move Zugzwang". If instead Black has the 20 Move Zugzwang, then White not playing Bg2-h3 and forcing a capture would be a likely blunder!
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
How about just "trying differently" ? For example, who in Canada has thought about contacting the Kasparov Chess Foundation to see how it could help promote chess in the education system in Canada ? Extracurricular activities in schools count for very little. Once categorized into "extracurricular" chess reaches a dead end. We must move well beyond that.
I remember reading something about the Karpov chess academy. That didn't quite pan out the way it was hoped that it would. If you want a celebrity that might have some impact then Justin Bieber with that not so speedy chess variant might be a better bet. I recall reading that Will Smith had lessons from Maurice Ashley as a birthday gift from his wife Jada (I think that's her name).
I don't think that extracurricular activities in school count for very little. You need to get your foot in the door. Mad Science is apparently having some success selling chess in Windsor schools though the first class is scheduled for February. Presumably the market is kids and parents that don't know about the alternatives.
I remember reading something about the Karpov chess academy. That didn't quite pan out the way it was hoped that it would. If you want a celebrity that might have some impact then Justin Bieber with that not so speedy chess variant might be a better bet. I recall reading that Will Smith had lessons from Maurice Ashley as a birthday gift from his wife Jada (I think that's her name).
I don't think that extracurricular activities in school count for very little. You need to get your foot in the door. Mad Science is apparently having some success selling chess in Windsor schools though the first class is scheduled for February. Presumably the market is kids and parents that don't know about the alternatives.
Please open your eyes and your mind and do some Googling (for example : http://www.kcfe.eu/en/press )
I did not mention the Kasparov Chess Foundation randomly. I was not talking about Karpov, Justin Bieber or some other celebrity endorsing chess. I was talking about an organisation that is dedicated to one thing and one thing only, introducing chess in the school's curriculum and that has obtained serious results over the last decade in many parts of the world. Check out for yourself.
Regarding extracurricular chess, there are many reasons why it should only be pushed as a complement to regular hour chess teaching. One of them is that it then invariably becomes one simple pastime among others to keep children busy and quiet after school time. One other thing is that if you only get in schools through the extracurricular door, it generally means that you have failed to sell chess properly as a great learning and developping tool for kids that must be taught and not only played. You are not then likely to get any further. Chess will remain extracurricular and "just for fun".
Futhermore I believe that most professional people involved in the field will agree with the following :
If you want chess to become mainstream both as a game to play and as a subject to teach, it is essential to make your way into a school's regular curriculum, or at least its regular hours. Teaching chess as a business with employees who can only have one or two classes after school each day, is not the way to go.
-Jan de Mortel (The Chess Instructor 2009)*
...if you only get in schools through the extracurricular door, it generally means that you have failed to sell chess properly as a great learning and developping tool for kids that must be taught and not only played. You are not then likely to get any further. Chess will remain extracurricular and "just for fun".
This is off-topic from this thread, but nevertheless, IMO if you try selling chess as such a learning and developing tool for kids, the comeback you will likely get from astute administrators is "Why just chess? Why not a whole slew of strategy games? Bridge, backgammon, even video games are learning and development tools. In fact, even poker can teach kids valuable lessons (money and risk management, patience, psychology, the math of probability). Maybe we need a games teaching expert, not a chess teaching expert." People like Jean Hebert who are a one-trick pony will not be considered for this role.
In fact, once you get the administrator thinking about strategy games, you also get them thinking about artificial intelligence as something that could be taught (at higher grade levels, once they've learned all the strategy games at lower grade levels). Then it would be people like ME getting hired... well, except they couldn't afford me.
By keeping chess teaching extracurricular, you actually increase the chances that it will just be chess and thus that people like Jean Hebert will at least get part-time employment.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
By keeping chess teaching extracurricular, you actually increase the chances that it will just be chess and thus that people like Jean Hebert will at least get part-time employment.
By keeping it extracurricular you increase the chances that the kids who are there actually want to be there. That counts for a lot in my somewhat limited experience.
By keeping it extracurricular you increase the chances that the kids who are there actually want to be there. That counts for a lot in my somewhat limited experience.
Your limited experience plays tricks on you. You should pay more attention to people with more experience and knowledge just as I do. With all the books available and all the information easily found on the net, there is really no excuse... :).
Chess and the chess teacher in the regular school hours are more than welcomed by kids. Imagine, it is chess (a game!) rather than math or some other regular subject. In extracurricular time, it is not such a good trade off for the kids : it is chess instead of free time (relaxing and recreation). Not conducive to any learning at all.
Tweet
Then you should contact FIDE rather than waste your time here, because they are the ones to be convinced.
Comment