< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Apr-12-11|| ||aberent: Thanks I will look into it.|
|Apr-12-11|| ||aberent: Ok I have published a new version, I tested both the 2 bishops on the same column/row and the 4 knights scenario. It should work now.|
|Apr-12-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: 3 bishops works now...
...disambiguation-wise. However, I was declared to have lost on time as Black in this position (after letting my clock run out to see if just that would happen):
click for larger view
Strictly speaking, the moment I lost my last piece that wasn't a unicolor bishop a draw should have been declared, as mate can no longer be achieved. I'm not claiming all such positions should be written in; there are too many, so a couple "bugs" will necessarily have to remain there. No way, though, should a player be declared to have lost if his opponent only has a bare king left.
220.127.116.11 should say that if one player runs out of time and his opponent only has a bare king left, the game is declared drawn.
|Apr-12-11|| ||YouRang: Question: When a game ends, a little dialog pops up announcing that the game is over, and the OK button does this countdown (from 10 to 1 I think). We must wait for the countdown to finish before we can hit OK.|
Is this necessary? If not, I would prefer to just hit OK and be done.
|Apr-12-11|| ||aberent: The 10 second count down is there for safety reasons to ensure that the game is written to the server correctly before you leave the room. Only the winner gets the 10 second count down. I will look into removing this in the future.|
|Apr-12-11|| ||aberent: "if one player runs out of time and his opponent only has a bare king left, the game is declared drawn"|
What do official chess rules say about this? I think the game should draw based on lack of dark square bishop not the piece inbalance.
|Apr-13-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <9.6 The game is drawn when a position is reached from which a checkmate cannot occur by any possible series of legal moves. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing this position was legal.>|
(This is the rule that says draw should be immediately declared when only unicolored bishops remain.)
<5.2.b. The game is drawn when a position has arisen in which neither player can checkmate the opponent's king with any series of legal moves. The game is said to end in a "dead position". This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the position was legal. >
This is essentially identical to 9.6.
<6.9 Except where one of the Articles: 5.1.a, 5.1.b, 5.2.a, 5.2.b, 5.2.c applies, if a player does not complete the prescribed number of moves in the allotted time, the game is lost by the player. However, the game is drawn, if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player's king by any possible series of legal moves.>
This is the rule that says if the opponent only has a bare king left, or otherwise insufficient mating material (for example, a sole knight against my bare king), then the game is declared drawn even if I run out of time.
In practice, I can only think of three positions that should be declared draws automatically by your software:
- both players, combined, only have kings and unicolored bishops left
- only two kings and one knight remain on the board
- only bare kings remain on the board.
In addition, a draw should be declared if one player runs out of time and his opponent only has
a) a bare king left
b) unicolored bishop(s) against the temporally challenged person's king and rook(s)/queen(s) (unicolored bishops can never deliver checkmate against any combination consisting only of rooks, queens and bishops of that same color)
c) one knight against the temporally challenged person's king and queen(s)
(Of course there <are> other positions where these rules should apply, but those are too complicated. For example, strictly speaking, this position should be declared an instant draw based on the rules above
click for larger view
as neither player can possibly checkmate the other.)
|Apr-13-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: In addition, at least one more disambiguation issue still persists...|
Disambiguation with multiple <queens> fails totally, not only in rank-and-file cases but even in those where only one, rank or file, would be sufficient:
1. d4 d6 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2 Bf5 5. O-O e5 6. d5 Nb4 7. Nh4 Nxc2 8. Nxf5 Nxa1 9. Nc3 g6 10. Ne3 Bh6 11. Bd2 O-O 12. Qxa1 Bxe3 13. Bxe3 Ng4 14. Bd2 Qd7 15. h3 Nf6 16. Bh6 Rfe8 17. e4 Qe7 18. Qc1 a6 19. Bg5 Rf8 20. f4 Rae8 21. fxe5 Qxe5 22. Bxf6 Qxg3 23. Qh6 Qe3+ 24. Qxe3 Re6 25. e5 Rxf6 26. exf6 Kh8 27. Qe7 Kg8 28. Qxc7 b5 29. a4 bxa4 30. Nxa4 a5 31. Qxa5 Rc8 32. b4 h6 33. b5 g5 34. b6 Rf8 35. b7 g4 36. hxg4 h5 37. gxh5 Kh7 38. Qa8 Rg8 39. Nb6 Kh8 40. Nc8 Rd8 41. b8=Q Re8 42. Kf2 Kh7 43. Re1 Rf8 44. Qb1+ Kh6 45. Qb7 Kg5 46. Rh1 Rxc8 47. Qxc8 Kxf6 48. h6 Ke5 49. h7 f5 50. h8=Q+ Kf4 51. Qb6 Kg5 52. Qc7 Kg6 53. Rg1 Kg5 54. Qd8+ Kf4 55. Rf1 Kg4 56. Qc3 Kf4 57. Qa3 Kg4 58. Bh3+ Kf4 59. Bg2 Kg4 60. Qb3 Kf4 61. Qd3 Kg4 62. Bh3+ Kf4 63. Ke1# 1-0>
|Apr-13-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: The weirdest disambiguation bug yet... this time with rooks.|
1. b3 Nf6 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 e6 4. f4 Bd6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 b6 7. O-O Nb4 8. a3 Nc6 9. d3 Nd5 10. Qd2 Bb7 11. Nc3 Qf6 12. Nd1 Qg6 13. Nf2 Bc5 14. d4 Bd6 15. c4 Nde7 16. Bd3 f5 17. b4 Nxb4 18. axb4 Bxf3 19. g3 Bc6 20. c5 Nc8 21. cxd6 Nxd6 22. Rfc1 Rfc8 23. Qe2 Qh6 24. Rc3 Bb7 25. Rac1 c6 26. b5 Rd8 27. Ba3 Nxb5 28. Bxb5 cxb5 29. Bd6 Bc6 30. Nd3 Be4 31. Rc7 Bxd3 32. Qxd3 a6 33. R1c3 Rab8 34. Ra7 Ra8 35. Rcc7 Qf6 36. Rxa8 Rxa8 37. Rxd7 Rc8 38. Be5 Rc1+ 39. Kg2 Qf8 40. Rxg7+ Qxg7 41. Bxg7 Kxg7 42. d5 exd5 43. Qd4+ Kf8 44. Qf6+ Kg8 45. Qxf5 Rc5 46. Qe6+ Kf8 47. Qxb6 Rc2+ 48. Kf3 Ra2 49. Qd6+ Kg7 50. Qxd5 Rxh2 51. Qd7+ Kg6 52. Qe6+ Kg7 53. Qxa6 Rh5 54. e4 Kh8 55. Qb7 Kg8 56. e5 Rh1 57. e6 Rf1+ 58. Kg4 h5+ 59. Kg5 Re1 60. Qf7+ Kh8 61. e7 Rxe7 62. Qxe7 b4 63. Qxb4 Kg7 64. Qe7+ Kh8 65. f5 h4 66. gxh4 Kg8 67. f6 Kh8 68. h5 Kg8 69. f7+ Kh8 70. f8=Q# 1-0>
<33.R1c3> sounds good. So it should - <33.R1c3> is exactly what I played. However, the PGN viewer for some reason still manages to move the rook on c7, and accordingly messes the rest of the game up!
|Apr-13-11|| ||aberent: Thanks I will look into it.|
|Apr-13-11|| ||aberent: Great bugs, both PGN bugs should be fixed now. Thanks|
|Apr-15-11|| ||crawfb5: I hadn't played the computer for a while, so I tried a 20 min game. The computer uses much better time management now. Before it routinely lost on time, no matter who had the better position.|
|Apr-17-11|| ||Viewer Deluxe: Hi <SwitchingQuylthulg>,
Hitting so many and so basic problems must feel very discouraging. In chess terms we might put double question mark (??) next to the software author. To somewhat ease the pain you can always visit my pages at http://chesstuff.blogspot.com/2009/.... Paste your PGN, hit “Next” and you will receive the following:|
1) A high quality PGN parsing which will tell you if there’re problems with the PGN itself. I’m yet to see a valid PGN which didn’t pass my PGN validator.
2) A robust viewer (CVD) which handles all special cases including all kind of disambiguation issues. If CVD is able to play a PGN correctly we should expect other viewer to do the same.
|Sep-12-11|| ||aberent: Posted new version 18.104.22.168 which fixed:
1. Bug that would allow a player with insufficient material to win a game on time.
2. Tie games would not show the last move in the PGN viewer.
3. Old chat would replay from a previous game when the same opponents played again.
|Sep-12-11|| ||juan31: I hope Chessgames, have (tengan) a lot of lucky (suerte) in finish the Playing Zone only I have a question about, here in Chessgames are Masters but (like me)just aficionados, the difference is large, ¿the points go to have the same value for both ? ¿or are going to be a equilibrium ?|
|Nov-28-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Seems a computer's rating isn't affected by a draw. My rating changes as supposed, but the computer's doesn't!|
|Nov-28-11|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Also, it would be really nice if we could flip the board in the PGN viewer :)|
|Mar-26-12|| ||morphynkapa: I have a question: In the playing zone I see only computer opponents. Do members play members or is this beta test just for members to play against computers?|
|May-18-12|| ||DrNyet: Is this project still in active development?|
|Jul-12-12|| ||YouRang: Playing Zone Checkmate BUG
Here is the PGN of a game that I just played as black vs. the <cheating> Playing Zone computer:
[White "Computer 6"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Nc3 Be6 4. Bb5+ c6 5. Be2 Nd7 6. d4 Be7 7. d5 cxd5 8. exd5 Bf5 9. Be3 Rc8 10. O-O a6 11. h3 Ngf6 12. Nh4 Be4 13. Nxe4 Nxe4 14. Nf5 g6 15. Nxe7 Qxe7 16. Bf3 Ng5 17. Bg4 f5 18. Bxg5 Qxg5 19. Be2 e4 20. Qc1 h6 21. Qxg5 hxg5 22. Rac1 Kf7 23. c4 Kf6 24. Rc3 Nc5 25. Ra3 Rh7 26. Rc1 Rhc7 27. Rd1 b5 28. b4 Na4 29. Rd2 f4 30. Bf1 Ke5 31. cxb5 axb5 32. Bxb5 Nc3 33. Ra5 Nxb5 34. Rxb5 Rc1+ 35. Kh2 Ra1 36. Rb7 Rcc1 37. Re7+ Kf6 38. Rd1 Rxd1 39. Re6+ Kf5 40. g4# 1-0
Notice that after I stupidly played <39...Kf5?>, we had this postion:
click for larger view
Here, the Playing Zone computer announced <40.g4#>, instantly terminating the game with me as the loser!
The problem is that it's really NOT mate, because black has 40...fxg4+(e.p.). Nevertheless, I'm saddled with the loss. :-(
|Aug-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Something wrong with the clocks... I just played a 3-minute game as Black against <LoveThatJoker>, and before the first move the clocks were shown as "0:10:00 - 0:10:00"... <after> the first move they switched to something like "0:03:09 - 0:02:55", which I didn't really like any better!|
|Aug-26-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: And the "losing on time when the opponent has no material left" bug is still there, even though it was supposedly fixed a year ago.|
|Aug-26-12|| ||Memethecat: Also, I've played 2 30min games against the computer engine (1 of which didn't register on my 'games played'), the engine lost both games on time, it seems to play 6-7 opening moves at lightening speed, then all other moves take about 3mins, even obvious ones. So as long as you keep even & don't get mated for 25ish moves, your bound to win. Maybe I picked a 'weaker' engine (on both occasions) that's set-up to play that way. Anyway, I think you could build a Carlsonesque rating if you had the inclination.|
|Aug-26-12|| ||Memethecat: I just tried a 30min game against the engine with the highest ranking, No7, & the same again, it played its moves a bit faster, but still ran out of time before the endgame.|
|Sep-01-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Discovered a brand new bug, the weirdest so far: the <vanishing pieces on f8> bug.|
[White "Computer 2"]
1. c4 b6 2. d4 Bb7 3. Bf4 e6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Nf3 f5 6. Qb3 Bxc3+ 7. Qxc3 Nf6 8. O-O-O O-O 9. Bg3 d6 10. Ng5 Qe7 11. Qe3 Re8 12. Qf4 Nh5 13. Qh4 g6 14. a3 h6 15. Nf3 Qxh4 16. Bxh4 g5 17. Nxg5 hxg5 18. Bxg5 Kg7 19. e3 Nd7 20. f3 Nhf6 21. Bd3 Kf7 22. Kb1 Rg8 23. Bxf6 Nxf6 24. Rd2 Ke7 25. Re2 Rg7 26. e4 fxe4 27. fxe4 e5 28. d5 Rag8 29. g3 Bc8 30. Rg1 Bg4 31. Rf2 Bh3 32. Rd1 Ng4 33. Rfd2 Rf7 34. Rc1
As I dropped the rook on f8 it... vanished from the board. Nothing was shown on f8! To be fair to the program, the rook was on f8 all right; it just wasn't shown. And selecting it was a pain - the only way I could move it was by selecting <another piece>, trying to move that piece to f8 (thereby somehow triggering a selection of that rook), and then clicking on the square I wanted to move it to (whereupon the rook reappeared on the board).
35. Rcc2 Rf2 36. Rxf2 Nxf2 37. Rd2 Nxd3 38. Rxd3 Rf1+ 39. Ka2 Kf6 40. Rd2 Kg5 41. Re2 Kg4 42. Re3 Rf3 43. Re2 Rf1 44. Re3 Rf2 45. Rc3 Rxh2 46. Re3 Rg2 47. Kb1 Rxg3 48. Rxg3+ Kxg3 49. Kc2 Kf3 50. Kc1 Kxe4 51. b3 Kd3 52. Kb1 e4 53. Kc1 e3 54. Kd1 e2+ 55. Ke1 Bg4 56. c5 bxc5 57. b4 c4 58. b5 c3 59. Kf2 c2 60. Kg3 c1=Q 61. Kxg4 Qe3 62. Kf5 e1=Q 63. Kg6 Q3g3+ 64. Kf7 Qef2+ 65. Ke8 Qe5+ 66. Kd8
Here the same problem occurred again as I moved my promoted queen to f8! Luckily I didn't have to figure out how to get it moving all over again...
67. Kd7 Qee7+ 68. Kc6 Qfe8+ 69. Kb7 Qxb5+ 70. Ka8 Qee8+ 71. Kxa7 Qeb8# 0-1
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·