Please sign up -> 1500 ;), 10000 :D, 1600 ;) (single elimination for 8, Fisher's clock 3/0.8/15 with autopass & immediately start)
More informations about Fischer's clock on BrainKing & BrainRook

Alquerque - i need 4 players more
& other games

coan.net: ah! sounds logical :)

thanks :)

Hrqls: The game/match is a "2 wins match" - so I think you only gain a point for a win.

... where the "2 point match", I think it gives you both .5 for a draw if I remember correctly.

my opponent and i agreed on a draw in this game but we got 0 points for it ?

is this a bug ?

Groeneveld: thanks

Groeneveld:

Congratulations cobra1 for winning the tournament

Hope next time ,there will be more players who take part

Groenevelds Alquerque Tournament

just 2 weeks to go,
you can still enter,but i need at least 7 players
to start,for 3 or 4 I find it useless

so come on,what are you waiting for??

i understand
but 1 player after so many weeks,
it's a shame,a great shame....

I found it a good idea,a tournament.but i quit with trying there is no animo

1 player,WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU ....

I don't play it for the same reason as Rod..it's a shame really i don't play Jarmo very often, for the same reason and i love that game.

I don´t play alquerque anymore as well. White wins all the time...

a week has passed and not a single entry,

I can't believe it....

oke,but good that you react...

I don't play Alquerque much anymore, because the board is too large, and it frustrates me to scroll up and down constantly to see the whole board. I enjoy the game, though! If Fencer shrinks it, in the future Groeneveld, I will start playing again.

come on,guys
were are you guys??

Don't you wanna challenge the other top players??

Here is a direct link to the tournament:
Groenevelds Alquerque Tournament

everyone can enter,must most of all these
players

Volgorde Speler BKR Aantal partijen Aanwezig

1. chinook 2070 112 (131/3/5)
2. sotolon 2026 99 (103/1/4)
3. lilyevansova 2023 80 (79/1/4)
4. Andre Faria 1926 53 (34/13/7)
5. Pedro Martínez 1923 35 (33/3/1)
6. Milioi 1878 59 (41/4/14)
7. Bobes 1856 50 (46/1/13)
8. Rex Nihilo 1842 41 (33/2/8)
9. Bratr 1764 58 (36/2/20)
10. Gabby 1695 29 (26/0/14)
11. Fencer 1658 39 (26/0/13)
12. Stoupa 1654 44 (25/0/19)
13. Marfitalu 1645 27 (17/2/10)
14. SilentBob 1616 33 (19/0/15)
15. Tanein 1609 27 (18/2/8)
16. rod03801 1578 41 (21/0/20)
17. sarok 1568 54 (23/1/42)
18. MAX MAXIMUS 1500 62 (27/0/36)
19. SG1fan 1499 43 (25/2/16)
20. Nightstorm 1486 70 (34/0/36)
21. tycho 1463 38 (21/0/17)
22. Stevie 1451 55 (22/5/28)
23. Backoff 1420 30 (16/0/14)
24. Krecik 1399 26 (10/2/16)
25. Nirvana 1300 91 (27/2/64)
26. eleonora 1258 43 (7/1/35)
27. youbet 1257 67 (22/0/45)
28. harley 1026 40 (8/0/32)

Groeneveld Alquerque Super Tournament request 2. april 2006, 03:00:03
toon berichten van deze gebruiker | link
When the running tournaments are over
I find it nice idea,when a tournament will be hold,where all or allmost all of the ranked players will appear,
the 28 players with a rating an let's say 36 with a provisional rating

do you find this a good idea,
and are you free,just
drop a note,to say you will enter

and top 28 players,do specially....

how more of you will enter,how greater the tournament



Groeneveld
Beantwoord

see next message

Happy New Year,

Sophisticated contestants please message me to arrange faster matches.

No cheating!

Key McKinnis: PM Fencer and he'll call the game a draw.

I'll try one more time when he moves again.

rod03801: Have heard the same as well...

Oh, I was looking at it wrong too...

have you asked your opponent for a draw already, with an explanation of why it's a draw???

I think I have heard of Fencer "drawing" games for people in a situation like that when one person refuses a definite draw.. but maybe I imagined it.. Worth a try though.. :-)

Doesn´t he accept the draw offer?

Ok, now how do I get my opponent to realize this.

Key McKinnis: You´re right. I was seeing the board upside down... You can make perpetual moves between your 2 pawns...

Ok, then how does he beat me? He can't move backwards.

Well, the MATCH will be a draw...

of course not...

Is this game a draw? http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=1010421

Up until now I've only ever played tablut on here. The addition of alquerque piqued my interest, but unfortunately the forward-only movement rule put me off--I might as well play draughts (or checkers, to those of you who prefer American English).

Now I've got a real alquerque board to play on, so I've got interested in the game again. I will, however, wait patiently until the time when Fencer creates an Alfonso variant, before I join in. I say patiently, as I've already mentioned elsewhere the possibility of more tafl variants to complement tablut :-)

lol.. you're allowed..

rod03801: sorry Rod, misread the convo.

Huh?? we are talking about the size of the game boards... not discussion boards..

rod03801: well, since he did his recent re-shuffle..... I would assume that this board and Jarmo are here to stay for a while - I certainly dont know any different.....

Fencer plans on shrinking both the Jarmo and Alquerque boards at some point. At least that's what he said after the games were first added.

furbster: not that I know anything.... but have you asked Fencer to change what you say?

rod03801: same here i tend not to play it because the graphics are too big, the same with Jarmo which is a shame cos i like that game.

Hello

We are currently looking for a new moderator of this board. Are you interested?

More Information: Check out the Members only board

To Apply: Just Send me a Message

PLEASE do not post if here since I may miss it, just send me a message. Also feel free to send me a message with any questions.

For me, the size of the graphics keeps me from playing it much now.. Takes WAY too long to load on webtv, and I hate scrolling back and forth to see the whole thing, to decide on my move..

So, I'm wondering what the progress is on making the graphics smaller?

Come on Fencer, you don't have much to do! LOL...

Is there any progress in changing alquerque rules?

This game is beeing less and less played, and sooner, if rules will not be changed, no one will play it...

He plans on shrinking them eventually. I hope it is soon, because it is such a pain to play the game having to scroll up and down to see the whole board..

Fencer, would it be possible if the Alquerque game boards were shrunk down to add double Alquerque here?

http://www.zillions-of-games.com/cgi-bin/zilligames/submissions.cgi/92230?do=show;id=318

If these have been mentioned, let me know.

Reza likes the idea of backward captures.

Sunfire and I talked about playing it on a 6x6 board.

The game is meaningless as it stands now.

I think, that even with the present rules there is still the possibility to draw if both players are equal in pieces and none of them want to attack (or to make a senseless attack). If one of the players has an advantage in material after the middle game, he should IMHO win. It means: There would be probably more draws with the Alfonso's rules. There is a lot of draws in chess or checkers - so what? Playes who can't or don't want to see a draw and want to play forever to make their opponent tired are not worth playing with. :-)

If i can suggest one thing Fencer don't implement those variants... One has the problem of making impossible the task of one coulor the other if one player wants to stuck the game, the game could last forever, and the win will become for tireness not for strategy...
I know i'm not the majority of the players and I'm just a pawn but please reconsider, now you have one game that nobody (in his sense) wants to play don't transform in 2 variants that no one wants to play it ...
just my 2 cents of course...

Great, I think thats what the majority of players want.

Mmmmm, Bell's and Alfonso's variant sounds reasonable.

Fencer, if we can come to a consensus on a way to make this game better, would you consider changing it, or does it stand the way it is?

ok, got it! thanks BB!

I don't know exactly which move (number) are we talking about. I tried to explain how I understand the rules.

Let's say, that there is

(a) a black piece on c1, white on c2 and nothing on c3 = black can't jump, because he can't move backward at the beginnig of his move...

(b) a black piece on a1, white pieces on b1 and c2, and c1 and c3 are empty = black can/must jump from a1 to c1 and because he's already moving, he must jump further to c3.