cd power: Thanks, but I tried that. Anyway, I got a chance to try it on a different computer, and it doesn't seem to be a problem there. So it's probably just me.

Does anyone else experience trouble with the auto-refresh function lately, or is it just my computer that needs fixing? Sometimes it doesn't work at all, sometimes it's just slower than usual.

Actually, I think this has at least as much to do with different game cultures as it has to do with nationalities. In chess, you will sometimes find yourself in a position where:

- you know you're lost
- you know your opponent has the skill to win the game
- but it will still take some 30-40 moves for them to do so.

I suppose that's why experienced chess players have developed this etiquette that you resign when you know you haven't got a chance (unless there's only a few moves left, in which case your opponent might actually be happy to mate you!). I've played chess with people from all over the world on many different sites, and I've never noticed that people from the US were any different in this regard.

The problem, I think, is when people take the game etiquette that they've learned at one game and apply it to a different game and expect it to be universally valid. Which is bound to happen now and then on a site like this. The solution, of course, is to try to tell yourself that whatever your opponent does, he probably means no harm... live and let live... and Fencer, please don't add any more achievements that requires the game to be played out to the end ;-)

pauloaguia: Yes, I thought about that after I posted. Actually you could post several games and delete them until you get one you like, or you could spend the waiting time analyzing the position in depth.

I guess my main point is that it's not equal conditions for the players, and I suppose it wouldn't be that difficult to repair?

I'm probably not the first to notice this, but when you put a game on the waiting list with random start position (such as Fischer Random Chess or Knight Fight) the position is shown in the waiting game. Isn't this a clear advantage for the player who takes the challenge? Shouldn't the position be randomized after the challenge has been taken?

DeaD man WalkiN:
I'd say in Hyper Backgammon, finishing a game in 10 moves or less is not that much of an achievement. I've played 29 games of HB, and 8 of those ended in 10 moves or less. So if it's supposed to be in line with the other achievements, the number should be set lower IMO.

Roberto Silva: ...You were just unlucky...

Thanks for answering - I feared that ;-)

lukulus:

Yes, I suppose these percentages only give a very shallow picture of the possible color-biases. That was why I included several games, but maybe Knight Fight should have been left out.

Come to think of it, I've had a few games where people would take the challenge, then cancel the game immediately after. Is it possible (maybe only for paying members) to cancel a game when you got the "wrong" color, and avoid having the game rated?

When I create new games in the "waiting games" section, I always choose random colors. When I accept waiting games from the list, I almost always go with those that have colors set to "random". So, in the long run you would expect the randomness to even out and I would have an equal amount of games with each color.

Now, as you probably know, some games here are very color-biased. As I browse through the games statistics, I find that these games give one side an overall score of approximately 60% or more:
Horde Chess (white 74%)
Cheversi (black 68%)
Maharajah Chess (b 64)
Mancala (w 64)
Pahtum (w 62)
Hasami Shogi (w 62)
Swap Five in Line (crosses 61%)
Battleboats Plus (w 60)
Knight Fight (w 60)
Tablut (w 60)
Swap Five in Line is a little complicated because you have the option to change sides after the first move, so I'll leave it out here.

That leaves nine game types that are very color-biased. When I look at the games I have played of these game types (always choosing "random colors"), they add up to 107 games combined. Of these I've had the "good color" 46 times and the "bad color" 61 times.

My grasp of binomial distribution is a little rusty, but if I get it right, the probability of such an unequal distribution should be less than 10%. So my question is: Is there some kind of trick than I'm missing (and that some of my opponents are not)? Is there some crooked way of side-stepping the randomness?