I like the way IYT has their tournaments set up by several sections, the winner(s) of each section goes on to round two and plays the winners of round 1, etc. until one final winner is left. IYT starts 2 tourneys a week for all kinds of games. I play Halma 10 on IYT. The invitations to the Ts are at the top of the window page and are very easy to follow, unlike the Ts on this site. I would play in such Halma 10, and Halma 16 for 4 players.

Dryznik: Not sure if I understand how that is different from the tournaments here on brainking?

Dryznik: my "new" idea was to build up an alternative to those "round-robin"-games. to increase the thrill by the need to win each single game in order to head into the next round.... >;-B

diogenes: A knock-out tournament isn't that much different to a round-robin with only two players per section and no draws allowed, so I'd guess that much of the code is already available.

playBunny: there is a difference - there can be only one winner per section

can't the tournies be set up that way? i honestly thought they could...???

MidnightMcMedic: No, current tournaments have a min. of 4 per section - and draws are allowed.

D'oh, guess thats what I get for thinking while taking exams

Diogenes, Correct idea.
Czuch Chuckers, I am so used to IYT Halma 10 tournaments! Go to iyt.com, left menue column, tournament area, then click on tournaments in progress and choose one (or more) and take a look at jow they are set up. More than 1 player can win a section but play continues in next subsequent section until only one player emerges as the winner of that tournament. ;~)

Dryznik: Aye, it's a round-robin. So, like Czuch asks, how is that different to here? (Except that there can be joint winners of the final section.)

In games like checkers and chess the IYT tournaments are fine until you get to the final round. There you often find two programmers left standing and as most people know when one program plays another you can get 25 draws. IYT won't declare a winner and keeps generating endless final matches..and it can go on for years. LOL.

Purple: Poetic justice, if you ask me!

alanback: Yes indeed. LOL.

Purple: yes, very poetic, lol :)

Purple=I need to play the Halma tourneys here and do some lo0oking at the set up, other than than I think I should close my mouth! ;)

Dryznik: The Purple World Fellowship will be offering some excellent Halma tournaments in the next few days with some very good players.

Purple, Thanks. :)

When creating a game with yourself as the first player you should have the option to put your first move in. This wouldn't be shown to the oponent until after he accepts the game. Would also be nice to be able to set conditional moves in. If you have already planed your next 3 moves why not tell the computer them so it can play them for you if your oponent does what you thought it would. Would speed up game play a lot.

mctrivia: I second the conditional moves suggestion. Though I somehow think a firestorm is coming.

grenv: 'gameknot (for just chess) has introduced conditional moves. in games like pente, they would save a lot of boring moves.

In case they will be implemented, then there should be an option to let the opponent see your conditional moves or not, as in some cases it might be kind of spoiler :)

fungame: Of course the opponent should not see conditional moves until the opponent has committed himself to the respective prior move.

alanback: The advantage of letting the opponent see, is that by them accepting you can jump ahead that many moves all at once. This wouldn't be used much early, but can be very useful later when there are forced moves for a few moves.

I can't see why you would want them to see your moves. Now have it tell you that you are in checkmate in 3 moves because they have programed every posible way might be cool.

In chess there are a lolt of opening moves which have been names ... I am sure others with greater chess knowledge can give the correct details. I suspect there is the same in checkers too.

It could be that when a game is set up then the opening could be stated too so that people may accept a game already a few (standard) moves into the game.

mctrivia: On many chess sites it is possible to propose moves for both players. For example you may check your opponent and there's only one place to logically move.
This is very useful for some variants like anti and atomic chess. Not so useful in dark chess, lol.

That is basicaly what I sugested. Have the ability to say if the oponent does this I will do this. Or if he does anything but this I will do this. I also think that ability should be extended to multiple turns. So if my oponent keeps moving were I think he will the computer will automatically do the moves I pre told it I would do. Yes would not be very usefull in dark chess. Though I would love to see an AI version of dark chess.

mctrivia: You misunderstood. There are 2 types of conditional moves:

1."If my opp plays x then I play y. This may be useful, but how often can you predict the opponents move?

2.Propose to your opponent the next few moves. If he or she agrees play continues from that point. This is very useful in many "semi-forced" continuations. Against a weak opponent you may be hoping for a silly error, but a good player is likely to see the same continuation and agree.

example.
After
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5, black could move 3...a6 with the proposal 4.Ba4 Nf6

If white accepts he can play move 5 immediately. If not he may play an alternative to 4.Ba4.

When reviewing past games (I haven't played any yet, so I only review) it would be nice if it gave the players' name above the boards. Currently it says "Your opponent's board" and "Your board" but I'm an observer and don't have a board.

It would also be nice, given that the game is over, to see the boats in place right from the start.

grenv: That is very true. But in Chess a good player will predict his oponents moves several turns in advance. And some times for your move to work all it needs is for that player not to see the one whole in your plan. The problem with the secound type is the player may look harder to see the whole now that you have showed it to him. If you just programed it assuming he would take those moves then the blind way works just as well. And you should be able to program in multiple different paths.

I.E. if there is 3 posible ways he can go program all 3 ways.

mctrivia: But yor way still requires the opponent to make all the moves, so time is not saved. Therefore I would like both these options available.

grenv: The more options the beter. But time would be saved because as soon as your oponent makes his move he will see it is his turn again. Does not save time if you are both online but would save a lot of time if you average 1 move a day.

it would be nice to see the number of needed free game slots (for pawns) in a tournament when already signed up (it's shown before one signs up)

Luke Skywalker: Until the policy is changed, the standard number of required empty slots for all tournaments, regardless of games per round, are 10.

WhiteTower: You need as many games slots as there are possible games to be created. On a tournament that has a max of 4 players per round, you'll need 3 free slots (single game between each 2 players) or 6 slots (2 games between each 2 players).
These values are maxed at 5 and 10 respectivelly. So, in case of a tournament with max 8 players per section and only 1 game between each 2 players you'll only need 5 free slots.

WhiteTower: I didn't know that. Do you mean, if someone created a tourney with 8 players per section, 2 games each, a Pawn needs only 10 slots and not 16???

Eriisa: Search for "10 slots" in this board and you'll see Fencer saying so in late 2003. Now, that was for 8-slots-really-needed situations... I've never encountered any real situations with any other scnearios to be sure... I did follow a long discussion about the issue, though, and I was left with the impression that 10 slots are needed in all cases... I might be wrong!

Eriisa: Yes, that's true; and it's listed on the tournament page how many free slots are needed. But it is not on the page after you signed up to the tournament; it would be nice as a reminder, because the system allows you to sign up with less than the required number of free games but you are thrown out when the tourney starts.

Wee nitpick. It would only be 14 games for an 8-player section.

Conditional moves or similar would be very nice in reversi, particularly when you or your opponent can't make a move. Right now you have to wait until they get around to looking at the game again to pass the move...(one of the few things one of those(IYT) sites actually does right)LOL

Similrly for those of us who are dne in a tournament, even if it is still running, it would be nice to be able to sign up for the smae game type, since we are done in that tournament...(...)

tinksbell: That feature has been asked for about 135 times. It wont be implemented on this site.

Rose: That's a bummer

tinksbell: ditto, big bummer bu,t the big name says no.

Rose: Why not. Would be relitevely easy to implement. Specially in a game when the oponent has absoloutley no choice. From a programing perspective all they need to do is add an option to play your oponents move then your move if he does that. May take up a little space especially if you let a chess master program is next 5 moves in with conditions for the oponent doing several moves. I would be happy if they skipped the nice GUI interface and had a text box were you could type in a sequence of coded letters to represent your conditions.

When I am done the project I am working on write now I would even be willing to write the sodo code to do it for chess(minus error checking for wether moves are valid)

tinksbell: Of course this problem is solved by upgrading to a rook membership where the number of tournaments of each type is unlimited .... and there are other benefits too :)

WhisperzQ: With a rook membership you can play unlimited games true. But I want to be able to play my girlfriend, and other friends and don't want to have to always wait 5 days per move. If I could program in my next 5 moves then I would only have to wait 5 days for them to make there next 5 moves.

WhisperzQ: If I could afford it I would, but since I have a new baby and had to stop working, I may not be able to even renew the knight membership

mctrivia: My comment was regarding the number of tournaments ... a digression under this thread I know ... but I understand and agree with you desire.

Rose: That is his perogative, but how about this: When the game is set up(Reversi in particular) have the option of auto moves or not, if the players don't want them(I can understand not wanting it too) they don't have to play that type of game.