kleineme:
if you would like to talk about chinese chess, i have more to say.

Fencer: Would it be possible to add handicaps to Xiangqi?!

onigoroshi:
it will be a good idea.
i would like to play without the 2-knights against Fencer.

when i challenged them for a chinese chess game, all declined.
i should not waste my time to beat those guys.

kleineme:
how about the other side have a knight and a cannon?
it is posssible but like the puzzle in actual playing game it is almost won't happen.

i play online chinese chess like an OTB game, i don't read books, i don't analyze the situation by trail and error mothod.
it is pretty that i don't see my opponent's face and no one can shake hand with me.
i don't know what the other guy is doing.
yes, people are playing free style game, it is allowed at this site.

chinese chess is more complicated and less disputative, because of the rule and the board.

onigoroshi:
it is impossible to add handicaps in chess. there are no chess grandmaster can play without two knights against any body. the main reason is, the development of chess is very slow compared with the chinese chess, the one play with no knights must play attacking chess right from the first move.

i have played chinese chess with 3 guys at this site, they are all non-chinese players, KeithGraham(United States),FromHell(Bavaria) and Fencer(Czech Republic).
one thing in common, they lost a tempo(move) in exchange, that is, they play extra move to do the same thing.
in chess, it may be ok to do that, Kramnik was doing this by repeatedly moving his queen at the opening stage against Topalov, but in chinese chess, you lost one move, you are in trouble especially in the high level competition.
in chinese chess you play for the initiative, in chess, you play for the pawn.

435152: I don´t agree with you. In chess we also play for initiative as other players can tell you.

naughtypawn:
thank you for telling me that something as other players already knew.
you play chess ?

435152: Of course I play chess. It is my favourite game and I play it for years. I play in a club, in tournaments in team leagues,... so I tell you that players (I, we, others) play for the iniciative. It is quite simple. We, even, leave pawns to get the iniciative. With "in chess, you play for the pawn" you are showing a poor understanding of chess. And yes, I can talk about other players because I know lots of them.

naughtypawn:
did i say in chess you do not play for the initiative??
please read my post again
i just said "in chess, you may be ok to do that"
how much you understand the different between chinese chess and chess? what's your online rating in both? how many years you have played chess? i do not ask you about your chinese chess experience.

online rating is not the true actual rating, usually online rating is higher than the true one, the highest actual rating now for chess is 2800+, the player is the FIDE world champion Topalov. but sometimes i saw a online player with a 3000+ even 4000+ rating.
so what i see is a 1800 online player =0r< 1600 actually.

435152: In chess you can play 1.e4,e5 2.Qh5 (as some strong Gm) and if your opponent does not take advantage of this then you can get a playable position beacuse your structure of pawns is good and the material is equal. As Philidor said, pawns are very important in chess. The initiative is volatile, if you don´t get a mate or a material advantage then when the initiative dissapears the static elements of the position (material and structure of the pawns) say who has some kind of advantage. Of course, this doesn´t mean the initiative is not important in chess.
In XiangQi this is different, a tempo has more importance than in chess and therefore the move and properties of the pawns are rather differents. But i am not an expert about XianQi though i like it.

Matarilevich:
you just explained clearly and more in detail, it is exactly what i meant. everybody knows you have to kept up with your opponent for initiative.ha
in chinese chess, the initiative is more important, especially when you play with black which is always one move behind from the beginning.

chinese chess is more an open game than the chess, because of the set up, and the pawn structure are different. the pawns are the queen candidates, so you must pay attention to them. in chinese chess, no promotion for the pawn.

435152: "how much you understand the different between chinese chess and chess? what's your online rating in both? how many years you have played chess?

Too many questions, aren´t they?. What are you getting at? Are you trying to "guess" my skill in chess by asking me those questions. Of course I could answer you, but that´s none of your business. The skill is shown by playing in an online chess server like ICC or FICS, not by asking impertinent questions. I gave you my opinion and you answered with "thank you for telling me that something as other players already knew.
you play chess ?", which is a stupid statement, with no argument at all. Let´s finish this. You have an opinion and I have mine, that´s all.

Matarilevich:
> you can play 1.e4,e5 2.Qh5
well, of course, because you have white, you can lose the advantage of being white, I guess if you are black, it is more difficult to play 1. Cf3 h6 2. Cc3 a6, because the development is also very important in chess.

About giving a pawn or two to gain tempos :
In some situation, you can give a pawn to gain initiative, like in kings gambit.

In chinese chess, a pawn has less value than in real chess, and there is no "pawn structure", as in chess. What's more, a pawn has very little value in the opening.

For most of us occidental chess players, we tend to play xiangqi in the same way we would play chess, which is probably a handicap sometimes. Asian players, which are far superiors, mostly do not care of losing pawns or elefants or even cannon, because they see the development as a major challenge and do not concentrate too much on material.

Maybe we are just like "bunnies" for many chinese players, because we did not learn the game as kids and no one did teach us the strategy correctly.

Maybe when we win against chinese, we have to win tactically, by calculating further, even we suffer domination on the board.

I am not convinced I would lose against a chinese GM with 2 knights handicap. Nor would I lose against Kasparov with 2 knights handicap. I do not know...

mangue:
>I am not convinced I would lose against a chinese GM with 2 knights handicap. Nor would I lose against Kasparov with 2 knights handicap I do not know...
well, as i said before, in chinese chess 2 knights handicap is played between two players one is much stronger than the other, it is not easy for a beginner to win 2 knights handicap against a GM, it may take a long time to do it, or you never could do it if you can not improve yourself, i have seen many people playing chinese chess for life they could not do it. they are still a layman in chinese chess.
i do not know if you have played this kind of game against a chinese GM before, most likely, you did not, because you learned to play the chinese chess aganist non-chinese player, not a chinese GM, please forgive me if i quess wrong.
It is impossible in chess to play 2 knights handicap, because the development is much slower than the chinese chess, no matter who.

naughtypawn:
> Of course, I play chess. It is my favourite game and I play it for years. I play in a club, in tournaments in team leagues...
why you told me about this, it is not my businese, i am not interested to know. i do not care how many years you played chess, and when you played chess.
i did not argue with you about initiative in chess, because everybody knows about it.

yesterday, right after i sent my post to naughtypawn, something happened i was logout with a blank screen, the first thing come to my mind is : am i banned? if i said something wrong at this site, i did not receive any warning, then i told myself, what the well, i am going to quit anyway, i decided to quit after i finisfed the remaining two games.
to day i login again.

435152: no I have definitely not played a chinese gm before, and even if I learnt this game in asia, i have not meet any profi yet.

435152: Yes.. the site went down for a while yesterday. See Fencer's blog entry at www.brainking.info for details. :-)

And yes, the discussion boards acted a little funny right before the site went down..

my expected BKR change in chinese chess:
win:2067(+184),draw:1967(+84),loss:1867(-16)
so my chinese chess bkr is 1883=1600 actual ha

if you can predict your opponent's next move you will be ok.
otherwise, your opponent's move is unexpected to you, you are not better.

mangue:
i would like to refer to my game vs FromHell to express my view, that game is still in progress.

your post to Matarilevich on 13 October 2006, 10:27:55
..........
..........
>about giving a pawn or two to gain tempos:
In some situation, you can give a pawn to gain initiative, like in kings gambit.

435152 vs FromHell
14. pg5 pxg5 15. Nge4 Nxe4 16. Nxe4 Pf5

.......
.......
>For most of us occidental chess players, we tend to play xiangqi in the same way we would play chess, which is probobaly a handicap sometimes. Asian players, which are far superiors, mostly do not care of losing pawns or elephants or even cannon, because they see the development as a major challenge and do not concentrate too much on material.

17.Nf6 Na9 18.Cb9 Ch9 19.Nh7! Cxb9 20.Rb8 Kd10

the position of that game arrived at move 20 now,i will comment this game later.

blocking and pinning are very useful tactics in playing ziangqi(chinese chess). the rook is the most important piece, like a queen in chess, you must put your rook in action at the opening, so blocking your opponent's rook is a way to get the initiative, the most common way is rook+cannon to block your opponent's rook. on the other hand, if you rook is unprotected, your rook is pinned by your opponent.
there are many way for blocking and pinning depends on the situation.

435152: even if I cannot tell who will win in your position with fromhell Chinese Chess (435152 vs. FromHell) , the schema with black pieces totally inactive and worthless also exists in occidental chess, does not it?

i have played with the no.2 chinese chess player FromHell (2222), then i reviewed the games of the no.1 player Cryingloser(2238), i looked into the 4 games he lost to Chicagobulls. i am not convinced they should be on the top of the list.
one thing i like it, both have a nice nick, fromhell and cryingloser.

when i was browsing around smoeone's profile, i found the no. 3 chinese chess player , Harassed, who wrote a very interesting description:
................
................
................

Ratings are meaningsless by logic, but somehow they are important for our ego, that is strange paradox. Rating manipulation on this site is so easy and some even abuse that with multiple accounts.

This is only game site, real life tournaments matter more, but they are still just stupid games.

Pity it is easy for us to *know* and to *understand*, but we often cannot act regarding to this even ourselves. But may be one day...

Everything is about psychology. People are competitive. When we see one can, then we try to show them we can,too. Then kind of vortex appears.

..................................................

may be their ego are too heavy. ha
they are overrated!-435152 Oct 16,2006

well, no one does forces you to play rated game

a good player knows when to resign, when the game is already decided a good player will resign with no more plays.
the World chess championship which just finished not long ago, Topalov vs Kramnik, all the winning games were not played to the end, the loser just resigned with no more further play at the right time.
playing online chess or xiangqi game, sometimes my opponent won't resign in a hopeless position, i have never urged my opponent to resign, because i do not want to hurt his feeling, he may feel that he was offended.
i have never seen a good player will lost a game like this: red(loser) got checkmate with only 2 pawns, two elephants, two guards, and a king;and black(winner)has one rook,one knihgt,one cannon, one pawn,one elephant,two guards and a king.
do you think red should have resigned long time ago? please quess who played with red for this game? the NO.1 chinese chess player, CryingLoser vs Chicago Bulls, on 9 January, 2006, Confucius says:"Win a one-year membership" event.
the other 3 games against Chicago Bulls also not worth to comment.

435152: actually,  that person might have been playing for the action points or might have hoped you might make a mistake

danheg:
yes, may be, this is what was in CryingLoser's mind, but what kind of mistake that his opponent made will save him from defeat? ha

timeout?

Beren the 32nd:
your post on 29 April 2006,23:49:19
>Can anyone share their experience on this question?
If I win a chariot for a horse or cannon early on in the game, should this normally be enough to win the game(if I play well) or does my opponent often have chances to draw(if he plays well)?

for the first question, the answer is, yes. if you play well you could win. as other player also said so, I do not want to add more.
the second question, the answer also is, yes. but no one said anything about this.
you won material in exchange, you trade your knight or cannon for your opponent's rook. a rook's value is equal to 2 minor pieces,(knight+ cannon or 2 knights or 2 connons), some even said a rook is more than that. lets talk about the "one rook" ending, every one knows a rook vs a complete defendants( 2 elephants + 2 goards) is a draw, if you trade every thing and only with one rook vs a knight or a connon, then it is more than enough to draw.
how about the followings:
1)one rook+ a pawn vs a knight or cannon?
2)one rook vs a knight + 2 elephants or 2 guards?
3)one rook vs a cannon + 2 elephants and two guards?
4)one rook vs a knight+ a elephant + a defendant?

the question from my previous post should be:
a rook + a pawn vs a kngiht or a cannon + complete defendants?

the question from my previous post should be:
1)one rook + a pawn vs a kngiht or a cannon + complete defendants?
3)one rook vs a cannon + 2 elephants or 2 guards?

Chicago Bulls(red) vs CryingLoser(black) 8 June 2006, Glenfiddich

1.Pg5 Cbd8
2.Ng3 Nc8
3.Ece3 Rb10
4.Nd2 Ng8
5.Rb1 Ri9
6.Nh5 Cxh3
7.Cxh3 Rib9??

this way to exchange rook, black lost more than a tempo, it lost two moves. i wonder why CryingLoser,the no.1 chinese chess player, will play like this. it is a basic for every not so good chinese player.

8.Rxb9 Rxb9
9.Nxg7 Rb6
10.Ri2 Rb2
11.Re2?

red's move was a bad move, his next move is Nb3 to trade rook, black did not know to take advantage of this, black should have played Rc2 instead of Pc6.

i did not want to continue viewing this kind of game....

435152:
I have to agree with 435152, that my place isn't at the top of the ratings of chinese chess. I'm quite an overrated "beginner". But I'm nearly overrated in all kinds of games I'm playing here like written in my profile long time ago.

And I have to agree with Harassed's statement. Ratings ARE meaningless.

It should be impossilbe that someone like me is in the top 20 of the chess rating. Look at my games. Full of mistakes.
My rating is near 2300 but I'm playing like 1900 or so.

The only reason why I'm playing rated games are, that there are hardly unrated games here AND that other players have a circa appraisement of the playing strength.

If someone is a 2200 in chinese chess and a other a 1900 it is never sure that the 2200 player is really stronger than the 1900.
BUT most times the 2200 is stronger than a 800 player who lost every game before finishing the 20th move.


I hope that this was my first and last statement to my rating here on brainking.

(And I'm sorry about my bad knowledge of the English language.)

as i said before in my post re:yesterday-brainking.com on 13 October 2006

.....i am going to quit anyway, i decided to quit after i finished the remaining two games.......

now i have no more game remaining, it is the time to quit, i would like to enjoy my life by doing something eles.

this is the chat between KeithGraham and me during the first slow-stair game:

KeithGraham: what is your age?
435152: 72 old man, and you?
KG: it is hard to believe lol, i am 53

435152: http://brainking.com/en/UserAgreement

FromHell:
Of course, with few games as we have and with beginners also, we can have good rating. But not for long.

435152:
You have to understand, this site had mostly european and american players and Chinese chess isn't well known here I think or at least not high-level except very few players.
I simply don't understand the game. I can move the pieces, but I am not sure if I would be able to deliver a mate in some kind of endings without problems and I am able to lose pieces very fast sometimes.
When I played with more advanced players (ChicagoBulls) I was in losing position in few moves. Both my games with ChicagoBulls were deadly lost very fast - at least my feeling said that.

I think, for non-chinese players Japanese chess is much more attractive, because it has more common ideas with classic chess and attacks there look impressive. I understand in China and Asia generally also this strange game is very popular, I could imagine perhaps the population playing this game can be almost close to western chess, but for us it's simply too exotic.

Wondering about population, which plays Japanese chess.

befor i quit this site, i would like to do the self annotation of the following game: i hope to share my view with other players.
435152(red unrated) vs FromHell(black 2222) 2.
5 October 2006, 19:57:18

1.Che3 Ng8
2.Ng3 Rh10

black's move is flexible that may be developed to 12 different openings, for example: 3.Rh1 Ch4 4. Pg5 Ce8 5.Nf5 Nc8....Rh10 is more flexible than Nc8.

3.Nc3 Pg6
4.Pc5 Nc8
5.Rh1

now i have two lines to consider, i decided on Rh1, the other one is Cb5, followed by Pg5 to develop my knight.

5..... Cb4
6. Pe5 Ch4

black blocked my rook with two cannons.

7.

befor i quit this site, i would like to do the self annotation of the following game: i hope to share my view with other players.
435152(red unrated) vs FromHell(black 2222) 2.
5 October 2006, 19:57:18

1.Che3 Ng8
2.Ng3 Rh10

black's move is flexible that may be developed to 12 different openings, for example: 3.Rh1 Ch4 4. Pg5 Ce8 5.Nf5 Nc8....Rh10 is more flexible than Nc8.

3.Nc3 Pg6
4.Pc5 Nc8
5.Rh1

now i have two lines to consider, i decided on Rh1, the other one is Cb5, followed by Pg5 to develop my knight.

5..... Cb4
6. Pe5 Ch4

black blocked my rook with two cannons.

7.Pe6 Ece8
8.Pd6 Nf6

so far so good for both sides, the first 8 moves are all book moves following the theory.

9.Ce4 Rh5?

when i saw this move i was very surprised that my opponent, as the no.2 chinese chess player on the top list, would play like this. his intention is to capture my pawn at c5, if Pg5 Rxg5 or Ee3 Nxe4...

10. Rxh4 Rxh4
11. Cxh4 Cxh4

black lost one move for this exchange. now my next move is to block his rook to control the b-file.

12.Rb1 Rb10
13.Cb7 Gde9
14.Pg5

giving up a pawn to get my horse in play. if black wanted to keep the pawn after knight exchanged,then black has a lone cannon on one side it would not give me any trouble,i just concentrated to block his army on the other side, i felt safe on my right side.

14...... Pxg5
15.Nge4 Nxe4
16.Nxe4 Pf5

black should make that move Na9 now

17. Nf6 Na9
18. Cb9 Ch9
19. Nh7 Cxb9?

we played the last 3 moves quite quickly, black captured the cannon without thinking almost instantly, the reason may be, it looked like a trap red set up to win his rook, if black captured the cannon with rook, then Ng9 check, so he captured with his cannon, he did not know the cannon is poision. he should have played Cf9.

20.Rb8 Kd10

after Rb8, black's army are pinned on one side, he was completely paralyzed and i have my horse(knight) running free at will on the other side.

21.Nf6 Black resigned

this is my last post.

after i post my "last post" here, sometimes i still login to see if some one will comment on the game "435152 vs FromHell". i could not resist the temptation.

here, i found another game of CryingLoser, the no.1 chinese chess player of this site, i would like to comment on it.
there are many private games, i don't know why they are still a private game, they are "finished games" now.


CryingLOSER (red) vs Kleineme(black) 5 nov 2005
tournament: Glenfiddich(Oriental games vs Lorien)

1.Che3 Nc8
2. Ri2 Cf8
3. Rd2 Ng8
4. Pg5 Rh10
5. Ng3 Rh6
6. Cbc3 Pg6

black should have played Rb10 to control the b-file, if Na3 Ca8..

7. Pxg6 Rxg6
8. Na3 Rb10
9. Rb1 Cb4
10. Pc5 Ege8

should be the other elephant up

11. Rd4 Cb2
12. Rd2 Cb4
13. Rd4 Cb6

red was perpetually chasing black's cannon which is unprotected, if black wanted to keep the same moves, red must stop doing that.

14. Rd9 Gfe9
15. Nc4 Cf9
16. Rd2 Pe6
17. Rb5 Rg4
18. Rd6 Pc6
19. Rd7 Cf4
20. Na5 Pxc5
21. Rxc5 Nce7
22. Nb7 Rb8
23. Cxe6 Rxg3
24. Cxc10+ Exc10
25. Rxc10 Kf10??

black should have played Cf10 instead of Kf10, then everything is alright for black. if 26. Nd8+ Rxd8 27. Rxd8 Rg6 28. Ce5 Re6...

red won this game not because he played well, just because black did not know how to defend.
the game looked like a beautiful game red sacrificed two pieces but he did not calculate accurately.
the sacroifice is not the correct one.

so the loser became a winner

435152: That is a flaming comment (regarding Crying Loser, at the bottom of the last post. 435152 should be restricted when talking about other players.

435152: I got sick of reading so much criticism from you about games other players play. Why not analyze your own games? Come on, tell us how good or bad you are. Or do you play perfectly?

"Quote removed"
This is a flaming comment as emmett said. Don´t mess players about their play just because they don´t do as a professional.
I hope that post will be your last one, really.

Edited only to remove the quote referenced, since I removed it from the original posts

naughtypawn:
the previous post re: game analysis on 26 October 2006, 15:40:32 supposed to be my last post, but, after i read your post i decided to add one more as my last post here.

> "I got sick of reading so much criticism from you about games other players play. Why not analyze your own games? Come on, tell us how good or bad you are. Or do yoiu pay perfectly?"

i just pointed out the mistakes the other players play, it is not thing wrong with that, if you think that is a criticism it is up to you. in my view, if some one could do the same thing to me i will be very happy to accept that. that way, i know what is wrong with my play, i can learn from my mistake.
i remembered long time ago, every time my teacher pointed out my mistakes , i always said " thanks sir" this is my way to learmn to play my chinese chess, also, it is why i am better than all of your guys here.
i did analyze my own game, if you read the post on 19 October 2006, 435152 vs FromHell, after that post i wanted to see if some one will comment on "my self annotation" of that game, so i still login sometimes, hoping that some one will give me a good idea how to play that game better, or if i missed something that i did not see.

did i play perfectly? how good i am? to tell the true, i am better than most of your guys here. no body is perefect,there are always some one is better than you, but if your opponent see one move ahead of you, you always are a loser, you can not win.


at first, i think the chinese chess discussion board needed a player like me to do more xiangqi game analysis. i do not know that will make some one sick.
but this is my last post. no more.

435152: "at first, i think the chinese chess discussion board needed a player like me to do more xiangqi game analysis."
"it is why i am better than all of your guys here."



but this is my last post. no more.