|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 494 OF 494 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-30-09 | | kormier: naturally <kb2ct>, though black has to play with precision! |
|
| Sep-30-09 | | kb2ct: <kormier:>
I misspoke. Black wins the majority of games not wins by force. The solution is done by tablebase
The result. Out of 167,303,246,916 possible legal positions 52,048,121,059 are checkmates (31.11%). Out of the remaining 115,255,125,857 non-checkmate positions 48,713,659,039 are wins (for the side to move) (42.27%), 51,946,919,196 are losses (45.07%) and 14,594,547,622 are draws (12.66%). Summing up: Draw is unlikely in 3x4 chess (only 12.66%). Side to move surprisingly has disadvantage: 45.07% chance to lose vs 42.27% chance to win. Longest distance to mate is 43 moves. :0) |
|
| Oct-01-09 | | kormier: ok, then you say it's total=100%(31+28+31+10) approx....., it's sure is nice to know, it lighten my lantern...Tk's, By,by. |
|
| Oct-02-09 | | kormier: <kb2ct> i think i am not right, specially,.....i am trying to understand what is a non- checkmate win or loss? Well, i'm thinking you mean someting so evident in my own language .....tk's by by. |
|
| Oct-03-09 | | kb2ct: <kormier>
This might explain it a little better.
http://kirr.homeunix.org/chess/3x4-...
:0) |
|
| Oct-03-09 | | kormier: Tk's <kb2ct>, i really appreciate, 66.10% for white in a 3x4, next on line might be expecting something like 4x4 chess and 16 digits... lol..... By,by. |
|
| Oct-04-09 | | mworld: interesint, I never knew of 3x3/3x4 chess. Kb2ct you and the link are confusing. Is 3x4 chess solved to be a forced white win, black win, draw, or is it not completely solved? All i see is that every position is documented, but nothing that answers the question that if you start the game from move 1 and play perfectly by the rules what the outcome would be. Also, same question for 3x3 chess. |
|
| Oct-05-09 | | kb2ct: <mworld:>
It has been solved. What might be confusing is that there is no standard starting position. It has not been completely verified yet. The following is the longest mate known. http://kirr.homeunix.org/chess/3x4-... :0) |
|
| Oct-06-09 | | mworld: i think i am starting to understand, its more like fischer random...so for some starting positions its a forced white, others a forced black or draw, but the statistics of the starting positions show that most of them favor black? |
|
| Oct-06-09 | | kb2ct: <mworld:>
Yes, it is even more random than Fischer Random.
Probably more of a mathmatics or programing problem than a chess problem. Its only real value is the thought involved. :0) |
|
| Nov-12-09 | | ajile: http://truckbearingkibble.com/comic... Please check out this awesome cartoon! |
|
| Nov-15-09 | | mscoke: what an epic ! |
|
| Dec-03-09 | | kb2ct: I just bought the endgame studies database.
Exactly my cup of tea.
60. Euros.
http://home.studieaccess.nl/heijd33... |
|
| Feb-17-10 | | 7Heaven: doesn't it feel great to sing We are the World?
but singing by it;s own is never enough |
|
| Feb-17-10 | | whatthefat: <kb2ct: 3x4 chess>
Fascinating - I was thinking just a while ago that it would be sensible to try building up towards 8x8 chess with smaller boards, just to get a sense of the win/draw/loss ratios. The problem I encountered when I started to think about it was that even on a 7x7 board, the game dynamics are totally different. Take for example: 
click for larger view[ignoring the two edges]
The biggest challenges in designing such simplified versions are: 1) Bishops should presumably remain on different colored starting squares. 2) Should castling (in both directions) be retained? If so, both rooks should be retained. 3) Knights should probably start one rank in from the edge of the board. and I think this is the biggest issue:
4) Pawns can actually pass each other on the first go. And making the board smaller causes this to become an even bigger problem. At 6x6, a pawn can be captured after the first move - e.g., 1.e4 dxe4. At 5x5, a pawn can no longer move two squares on the first move. At 4x4, any pawn move allows a capture. Within these guidelines, it is actually very hard to come up with a relatively simple version of chess that would still bear some resemblance to normal chess. |
|
| Apr-05-10 | | thegoodanarchist: Is there going to be <another> game with GMMU? On the home page in the "What's New" section it says he has accepted the challenge, but when I clicked on "register here" I came to this page to see the game is over. |
|
| May-25-10 | | sujaramu: on the promise that after becoming premium member new website with all features will appear, I paid subscription. But I dont see any new webpage when I open chessgames.com. Kindly explain |
|
| May-29-10 | | Dionyseus: <thegoodanarchist> That's old news, that was his acceptance to the first match. |
|
| Aug-22-10 | | peristilo: We deaw! That's great! I love draws! Nobody loses! |
|
| Dec-21-10 | | JohnBoy: <thegoodanarchist: Is there going to be <another> game with GMMU?> - Doesn't look like it... |
|
| Dec-21-10 | | lost in space: I was hoping that the world team would get a chance to play him with white to also increase my knowledge about the Robatsch opening. It is so sad. |
|
| Jun-05-11 | | ahmadov: When is the next correspondence game? |
|
| Sep-01-12 | | master of defence: What happens after 36...Qxe2? |
|
| Aug-29-14 | | SpiritedReposte: Neat draw.
I'd say if ...Qxe2 Qf7+ and Qxc7 |
|
| Sep-10-16 | | ughaibu: Does anyone know if Umansky annotated this game, and if so, where? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 494 OF 494 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
