ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 238 OF 11026 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-20-03 | | uponthehill: chessgames.com could you please make a site for Scotch Gambit? (4.Bc4) |
|
Oct-20-03
 | | Sneaky: uponthehill, try the Opening Explorer |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Diggitydawg: <AdrianP> Here's a link to a better web page for the parody (it has diagrams): http://www.sissa.nl/stukjes_ed/onst... You have to scroll down a bit to see the english version. When I first saw it I was ROFLMAO. <uponthehill> Scotch gambit gets listed under King's Pawn Game (C44) ,buddy. Here's also a link to the games: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Phoenix: sooo.....
How do you get the links and games and stuff to show in blue? |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Diggitydawg: <Phoenix> Just copy the address on your browser onto the "Leave a comment" box. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Phoenix: <Diggitydawg>
thanks! |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: Since we're on the subject of draws...
A SERIOUS PROPOSAL TO END GM DRAWS.
start with a given time control. Let's say 20 moves in one hour. Either opponent may offer a draw after the said number of moves have been played. The other guy either accepts, and its draw OR he declines and the game must continue for another time control, another 20 moves after which pt either player can offer the draw, etc. SO there can only be one draw offer per time control. ANd if you want to fight it out you can do so, but it then compels you to play another 20 moves. You could also vary the time/moves for each session. E.g. 1st control: 20 moves per hour, 2nd control 10 moves 1/2 hour, etc. Varying the number of moves/session would be useful for fans who want to see a nice opening go a little while (more moves for the first session), but then if it gets to an endgame, the GMs dont have to fight long if they see it is easy draw. (less moves are required when there are only 2 major pieces on the board, for example) |
|
Oct-20-03
 | | Eggman: An interesting and creative proposal to end GM draws, DK. One quarrel though: it seems that this would often encourage GMs to take a draw earlier than they might otherwise be inclined, just so they can avoid having to play the game out all the way to the next time control. I wonder what the logistics would be of simply having a qualified referee / judge (or panel of same) who could quickly rule on whether peace could be declared in a given game, based on whether or not there was any play left in the position. This would be my suggestion. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: Dude: that is why I said the first time control could be anything: 20 moves in 20 minutes; 30 moves in an hour, 45 moves in 1 1/2 hours. It doesnt matter, with the first tiem check you can be assured of any number of moves you want. How about 15 moves in 5 minutes? That would be interesting to see from a fan stand pt.MOst of these guys should be able to get through an opening in a few minutes. Maybe some minor miscues but so what? chess is boring when played perfect. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: >> " ....it seems that this would often encourage GMs to take a draw earlier than they might otherwise be inclined, just so they can avoid having to play the game out all the way to the next time control." I do not necessarily agree. The decision to take a draw, would have to be agreed upon by both players (well duh!). That means both players have to feel that they cannot do much more with 20 more moves. If the 2nd player also needs a rest, he doesnt want to play 20 more moves, then what else can you do? Hold a gun to their heads? Make them sack the R on f3?? If one player feels he wants to take a rest, or whatever you suggest above, it still has to go through the other player. HE can still veto this decision and insist on 20 more moves. This seems the only legitimate way to do this. YOu cant have some 3rd party, who may not even be as good as the players, who decides this. That is nonsense. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Diggitydawg: <Draw offer> What if we simplified DK's plan so that the draw offer was eliminated for the first 40 moves? You'd keep the other rules (three-time repetition, inadequate material) in place, but eliminate the draw offer for 40 moves. This would make pre-arrangement of draws difficult. It's only in chess that we have a draw offer. Can you imagine what football fans would do if there was a rule that allowed the Raiders and the Chiefs to draw the game at the end of the first quarter? If football fans wouldn't accept that, chess fans shouldn't accept "grandmaster draws" in chess either. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | refutor: <it's only in chess that we have a draw offer...can you imagine what football...> yes, but chess is more of a wargame than a sport...in a war, you can declare peace before everybody on both sides is killed...i think that's more of the idea of the draw offer than in a sporting sense...or i could be totally wrong ;) |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | Bears092: What most of you don't understand is that these people don't play chess just for fun, they also make their living off of it. While some decisions may be unpopular, taking an early draw usually helps them along in the tournament. They aren't trying the bore you, they're trying to make money! |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: Your economic argument would make sense if players felt that they were making an adequate living. Many do not. Did you see Seirwan's reasons for retirement? players make money only because the fans want to see their sport. Presumably if chess were more popular, players would make more money. SO your economic argument makes no sense. Players would make more money if the fans could get what they came to see. Your argument could equally be turned around to say that the reason players DO NOT make enuf money is because of GM draws. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | sleepkid: Why all these complicated systems to end GM draws? Just go to a simple point system. 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw, a nought for a loss. It works for the Premiership, why not for tourneys? With a win 3 times as valuable as a draw (as opposed to merely twice as valuable in the current system) the standings in the table have the potential to shift quickly from round to round, and a draw will not neccesarily secure you anything. |
|
Oct-20-03
| | Eggman: "You cant have some 3rd party, who may not even be as good as the players, who decides this. That is nonsense." (By the way, how do you use that brown font to quote a passage?) There's a way around your objection, DK. The idea doesn't seem that impractical to me. Here's the basic plan: a) Players can only agree to a draw if it is basically a dead draw. b) A QUALIFIED referee will decide if criterion a) above has been met. c) If the referee decides that a dead draw has not yet arisen, then the players play on. In many sports, boxing for example, you have referees deciding the actual outcome of the contest, so why can't we have a referee who simply decides if the contest can be ended? As for the matter of obtaining a qualified referee, I would think that most GMs would be qualified to declare whether a position has reached a dead draw, and doing so would not require being as good as the combatants. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: Hmm, yes that could work I guess. I dont like the idea, but yes they use refs in boxing. So chess is like boxing? By the way. If your sport has to go to a 3-1-0 system, there is probably something seriously wrong with your sport. |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | sleepkid: DK: Nothing wrong with football (soccer) as far as I can tell. . . except that Robbie Savage (wanker!) is still allowed to play, Houllier seems to have little or no idea how to use the players he has, and Man U and Arsenal players pretend they're skating on banana peels and butter whenever they're in the penalty box. Apart from that, it's a great sport with a glorious tradition. |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | Phoenix: <Either opponent may offer a draw after the said number of moves have been played. The other guy either accepts, and its draw OR he declines and the game must continue for another time control, another 20 moves after which pt either player can offer the draw, etc.> I don't know, what prevents them from just taking the draw at move 20, as opposed to move 12, 14 or something?
Seems like the same thing. |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | MikiS: Is there any GM who plays for white 1.d4 and the slav for black and the najdorf for black ? |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | AdrianP: <chessgames.com>
Alexey Sokolsky
= Sokolsky Alexey
...? |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | MikiS: he doesn't play any of this openings
:( |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | refutor: mikis - Boris Gelfand plays everything you ask for, except the slav is his second choice v. 1.d4 another possible choice is Alexey Shirov |
|
| Oct-21-03 | | Benjamin Lau: MikiS:
Garry Kasparov fits under your criterion. The Slav is not listed under his most common openings for black, but that's only because he's been playing the King's Indian for so much longer, up until he declared that it was overanalyzed. |
|
| Oct-22-03 | | Giuoco Piano Man: Speaking of Garry K....has his computer match started yet?
Anyone know what site is coverng the games? |
|
 |
|
ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 238 OF 11026 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
