|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 52 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-11-03 | | pawntificator: You can also play fischerandom at http://www.uschesslive.org Hey thanks chessgames, for putting up that configuration chooser. Boy, you guys are sure on top of things over there. Keep up the good work! |
|
| Jan-11-03 | | pawntificator: <is there a list somewhere (e.g. would 54 as the "normal position" mean anything to anyone else) or is it just arbitrary for this site?> good question |
|
| Jan-11-03 | | refutor: also icc has it...every tuesday night at 6pm they have a swiss tournament, but you can get a fischer random game whenever you want |
|
Jan-11-03
 | | chessgames.com: <would 54 as the "normal position" mean anything to anyone else or is it just arbitrary for this site?> Our software that spits them out does indeed have an order to the positions, but it's arbitrary. I am not aware of any official order. So our use of numbers is just a tool so that we can communicate about the positions more easily. |
|
| Jan-12-03 | | Chess Champ: Sneaky, I always have to agree with you man.
You are right again, there is no symmetry and the pieces are not places correctly in FischerRandom Variant. I like your remarks about bad and good bishops. |
|
| Jan-12-03 | | Chess Champ: If u r intrested, tomorrow I will post my 429 two move openings here. I will only do that if I get enough votes.
AS I said my time is not for wasting. |
|
Jan-12-03
 | | Sneaky: Chess Champ, perhaps it would serve us all better if you published that list somewhere else on the internet (a personal homepage, for example) and provided the link to it. I for one am curious as to what kind of openings are on the list, but I can't see myself pouring over all 400+ of them. I have a problem with playing chess via opening lottery. Part of what makes chess the game that it is, is that different strategies can be valid. When I play 1.d4 I immediately define the start of a strategy: I am grabbing up the control over the important e5 square and threatening to establish a pawn duo with 2.e4. If my opponent tries to deny me e4 by playing ...d5, I challenge that with a gambit 2.c4. This is my plan to win the game. Now 1.g4 may be just as sound of a move as 1.d4. It too entails a plan. And yet I will have great difficulty in playing 1.g4 because I don't fully understand the strategy behind it. Now in your opening-lottery, I will be forced to try to understand the strategy behind 1.g4, because one day I might be playing it. No longer can I decide to specialize in one thing, that I do well, but I am forced to become a jack-of-all-trades. I agree that the better chess talent will, in the end, come out on top. Although I am no Grob's Attack specialist, I am sure I could flay a weaker opponent with 1.g4. And likewise, Kasparov could open with 1.Nh3 and procede to crush me. But that's not chess! I want to try out MY ideas on my opponent, not some idea drawn from a hat. |
|
| Jan-12-03 | | PVS: <I agree that the better chess talent will, in the end, come out on top.> This may only be true if you discount memory for opening lines as part of chess talent. |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | Kenneth Sterling: I am curious about this. I would be very interested to see what a game between two top grandmasters looks like. |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | pawntificator: I know there is at least one game of Fischerandom in this database, there was a small discussion on that page. I wonder if there are others, and if they could be displayed on this page? |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | PVS: <I would be very interested to see what a game between
two top grandmasters looks like.> One of them is the Game of the Day Leko vs Michael Adams, 2001 |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | judokausa1: There actually has been a Fischer random chess "world championship." Adams and Leko had an eight game match back in 2001. Adams won I b The purpose behind random chess is specific, to nullify any opening lines. Noone can argue that in many lines the openings run 20-30 moves. How is this real chess? Is a person's real chess ability tested or their ability to memorize opening lines? Surprizingly the middle game positions that arise in FRC are similar to ones reached in normal games. Forcing someone to play and opening proves nothing! Forcing someone to play a random move in the beginning is a lottery of luck. Maybe you get a good move manybe you get a move that is bad. This would just play into the hands of the players who can memorize opening lines. If my ability to memorize a larger amount of opening knowledge is better than the opponents I will have a better game. The main reason FRC is actually taken more seriously than any of the other variants is that is has answered the question of how to nullify the growing volume of opening theory. "Last year in Mainz, Peter Leko played an 8-game Fischer Random Match against Michael Adams. Both players were delighted about the possibilities of the exciting new chess variant. Leko won the match: the first inofficial Fischer Random Chess world champion! Hans-Walter Schmitt opened the tournament this morning and announced that the winner of the Open will play a match against the Hungarian candidate, if the tournament will be succesfull. When you look at the number of strong players in the Chess960 Open, it has to be a hit. 32 Grandmasters play in the Open, numerous International and FIDE masters. Top seed is Peter Svidler, the world class player (ELO 2690) noticed in round two that Chess960 is a different piece of cake: he lost in round two in just 15 moves against IM Sergey Galdunts. Some more strong players are Rafael Vaganjan (ELO 2667), Krishnan Sasikiran (ELO 2650) and some legends like Lajos Portisch and Vlastimil Hort. They do not play that much anymore, but Chess960 is a chess variant in which their creativity and experience is more important than a new move in the Najdorf. As all the other players in the tourney they are lookinf for adventure!" I think that paints a pretty clear picture. |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | pawntificator: <the exciting new chess variant> !! I guess I shouldn't be surprised at that statement. Some of the movies on the New Releases rack at the video store aren't what I would call new either. |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | pawntificator: Boy, people talk about the opening like it's Gospel. As if it came down magically from God. As if it wasn't arrived at through trial and error by the best players finding the best moves. By other moves being punished for their imprecision. Sure you can memorize an opening, but what good is that going to do? Maintain equality? If you or your opponent make another weaker move instead of the book move, then it still remains to take advantage of the error. You would have to memorize the opening, plus every winning response to every move besides the one given in the book. It can't be done. Well, maybe it can. But I'm not going to do it. I don't think it's necessary. Just play natural moves. The principles of chess govern the play. Maybe you'll get into a slightly worse position if you aren't up on the latest theory. Big deal! Win some lose some. |
|
| Jan-13-03 | | judokausa1: <Sure you can memorize an opening, but what good is that going to do? Maintain equality? If you or your opponent make another weaker move instead of the book move, then it still remains to take advantage of the error.>
The key area of chess we are talking about here is the grandmaster arena. At that level a slight opening advantage is often referred to as a matter of technique. All this proves is that an individual has the ability to get an advantage out of the opening due to their superior memory, not chess skill. Granted that for the VAST majority of us chess will always be fun. Super computers, opening theory etc will always be an area the average player will never have to really face. <I don't think it's necessary. Just play natural moves. The principles of chess govern the play. Maybe you'll get into a slightly worse position if you aren't up on the latest theory.>
I agree! This is the whole idea behind randomly placing the pieces on starting squares. You have to play moves based on principles not book lines. With a lottery starting move your artifically hoping that the player will not get an opening they are not familar with. It becomes LUCK instead of skill. With random chess (Fischer didnt invent it really but rediscovered it.) the middle games have a surprisingly familar feel. Development ruled by age old principles instead of brute memory. The reason random chess is actually more popular is this simple reason. It maintains the true to the theory of chess but nullifies the opening theory advantage. (I for one an still struggling with normal chess and will probably not ever play random chess on a serious level I am more impressed with it that any of the other chess variants I have ran into. That range from the silly the the bizzare.) |
|
| Jan-14-03 | | mdorothy: I think a lottery will increase desire for memorization even more.. and people will look for transpositions.. but, there aren't quite enough decent (decent enough for both sides in order to be considered) openings to really keep a GM from having so much memorized that they only get the short end of the stick 1/200 or so times.. where as with fischerandom, you have 960 possibilities to start out with, and then ur 430 or so lines for each position.. memorization is almost impossible, and getting a real advantage or disadvantage for nothing but luck is almost nonexistant. |
|
| Jan-14-03 | | Chess Champ: Sneak;
I have my own web page for 4 years, but I dont feel like giving the link on this site besides the webmaster may not like that... who knows what steams in his head...
But As I say, the lottery is good and i am not saying always good buddy, 50% 50% for different purposes because I like the go as you please style as well. It's part of chess. But Did I say anything about memorizing my openings and no dorothy, it will not create any new ways to study the lines, even fischerrandom folks can study if they have time... 'nough said. |
|
| Jan-14-03 | | Chess Champ: Again Sneaky... you are correct, but not 100% this time, that is the whole point ahead, using your chess theory and understanding to sail on the uknown ocean... And a boat does not sink if water does not overflow him or her...or it or whatever. It's a real challenge. |
|
| Jan-14-03 | | Chess Champ: Dorothy and Judo, you have some valid points.
But my 429 lottery is the best.
Anyway, today I've read that Madam Ollej
(We weote her all to no avail...) broke up with Einstein, I knew that will happen. |
|
| Jan-14-03 | | mdorothy: Ok, what I am saying is that your lottery idea just makes GMs try to expand their memorization more.. where as, in fischerandom, you have 960 starting positions. And then, lets reduce your number of decent lines to 350, so then using fischerandom, you have approx 336,000 'decent' lines, and memorization is basically wiped out immediately. All the lottery makes happen is you play somebody else's idea and style, whereas in random, its basically all your own. |
|
| Jan-15-03 | | THE GENERAL: how do you play domino vitali? |
|
Jan-16-03
| | Sneaky: domino what? |
|
| Jan-16-03 | | Chess Champ: MDorothy, you are wrong, I am not here to wipe memory completely, what I am offering is perfect, buttom line. |
|
| Jan-16-03 | | Chess Champ: I did not get enough votes, I was about to post something, but forget it... |
|
| Jan-29-03 | | oblivion95: This is great! My friends and I play only Fischerandom. With this page, maybe I can win even more converts! I cannot stand watching my life waste away while I study openings. It's just a game! It should be fun! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 52 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
