What a load of nonsense.

in that case ...you have a full load!! I used to think,you were a few shy!!

It was only under your excellent tuetelage that I was able to complete the compliment, heart felt thanks.

most welcome...grasshopper!

It's a win for black. It's a game of parity. Let the game consist of N numbers (i = 10 for the first example), x_0 .. x_N-1. Decompose each number in powers of 2: x_i = a_i,0 * 2^0 + a_i,1 * 2^1 + a_i,2 * 2^2 + ..... Now for 0 = j, look at the sums a_i,j, 0 = i < N. Call this sum A_j. A player wins if at the end of his turn, all A_j's are even. For the game 3464334643, we have A_0 = 4, A_1 = 6, A_2 = 6, and A_k for k > 2 is equal to 0. This means the person going second, black, wins.

4444444444 is also a win for black (this is very easy to see, black can always copy what white does). 8888800000 is a win for white - but not if he plays a8. In that case, black plays a1, resulting in 0888800000, which is a win for black.

votes for keeping Gothic Chess on Brainking.... HMmmm... which must mean there are 311 votes for NO.

If by chance you haven't voted.. and wish to have the game stay.. Please post your YES vote now!!.. hehehe

The list of YES votes

Big Bad Wolf
BuilderQ
Caissus
ChessCarpenter
Nasmichael
Pawnchucker
Rabbitoid
Redsales
ScarletRose.. Wow.. that's me!!
Walter Montego

I doubt if a non-vote means they want it removed, it probably indicates 'no strong feeling'. Even if only two people vote "yes" it should be enough.

Yea.... why not just count non votes as yes votes - then your "10" turns into "321" :-)

This game seems pretty easy. have seen ones similar to it, but I don't recall the details.

It seems to me that P2 needs to clear a row whenever P1 does. In addition to that, if P1 removes and even number of pieces, P2 should remove an even number as well, careful to remove only as many (or fewer) as P1 did. This will assure a win for P2. This will work for any even sized board (8 x 8, 10 x 10, etc.) and for any initial layout as you described.

If the game is played on an odd sized board (9 x 9, 13 x 13, etc.) the situation is reversed and P1 should always win by removing an odd number of pieces on his first turn.

Thad

PS: Chessmaster1000, I am quite interested in item such as this. I have a degree in Mathematics/Coputer Science. Please PM me if you care to discuss math more. I have been working on a proof of the Collatz conjecture lately. ;-)

nt

Wasn't there a story in the bible that said God would save some city if there were only 10 people who were "good"? Hmmm maybe this is a bad example since that city was destroyed! Ummm, ok, never mind.

<>Please PM me if you care to discuss math more. I have been working on a proof of the >Collatz conjecture lately. ;-)

Collatz conjecture??? Damn! One of my 4-5 favourite problems. This is amazing. It is so simple but yet invincible to any try for a solution.

"Mathematics are not ready for problems like this" A great mathematician has said. And he is even now right!

How your proof is going..? Unfortunately i think you are trying to find a snake at New Zealand. Just impossible......
Do you have any good ideas? I wanted to try once something but the collision with the wall was inevitable. I'm 20 years old and i've just started studying mathematics/physics seriously, so maybe my knowledge is not yet capable of understanding the things are needed to even close the solution.

Anyway hope to hear from you soon, about this 3N+1 problem.

Hey.. one question here.. In Chess.. can a King take a King?? LMCAO!!!

AAAIDU :-)
Anyway since MPSTU you the answer is NO!
But i think YANETUT.

What's all that AAAIDU and what not?

Just WTSIHSW it means.. hehe

waiting to see if he says what

And i thought you know something about acronyms:)

AAAIDU = Another Annoying Acronym I Don't Understand
MPSTU = Most People Seem to Understand
YANETUT = You Are Not Expected to Understand This

Laughing My Cute Ass Off.. :)

TBNISRHCAUI?

BLX & OT

This
Bloody
Nunsense
Is
So
Ridiculus
How
Can
Anyone
Understand
It

politer than mine ;o)

There is going to be a monthly article of Gothic Chess at Chessville!
This months article is on Gothic minatures!!
There are some great games...so check it out at

Chessville

Funny, I read that same article not an hour ago!

Just read it.. great article..

And speaking of which.. When is Mr. Trice going to be allowed out of the corner?? I mean.. hasn't he been Banned long enough?

I believe the amateur level is even weaker than the novice level, right ? I am not able to beat any level of that program, I don´t even see a chance. But I can play normal chess, not so well, but on some servers I have an ELO 1400 rating in normal chess. Has anybody the same experience with Gothic Vortrex ??? Thanks. I am really interested. ;-)

Gothic Vortex is a program that is difficult to beat. My friend redsales beat gothic vortex in two occassions, but he is a strong player and he had a rating of about 2000 in tournament play. I myself was never able to beat it and my rating here is between 1600 and 1700 these days. Gothic Vortex is tough to beat because it has a strong opening book, and most of us don't know what is in the book. If we knew the openings, we might have a better chance. In general, some principles of classic chess openings apply to Gothic Chess, but gambits and sacrifices are tricky in Gothic chess and that is why the program is so difficult to beat. I have seen the program sacrifice knights in a way that at first seems to give me a huge advantage, then five or six moves later it crushes me completely. I think it is very challenging, and therefore a lot of fun. Like all programs, it has the odd bug, but it is not as bad as some people here have claimed. If you read some people complaining about the program, sometimes they are just trying to get under Ed Trice's skin.

Thanks. I found a program as solution. With "CPUkiller" it is possible to make the 3 seconds levels weaker.

:) most people want have the programs stronger...

Are you kidding? Gothic vortex is a baby*** right now and with a clever or strong play it's rather easy to beat. Altough my Chess rating(not at Brainking) is not something big (about ~1930) i had a crushing winning score against G.V 1.0 and G.V 1.0.3, at every time control.
***Although i think in comparison with the baby PC-Chess programs of 1991-1992, it is far better. Logical since we are on 2004 and programming techniques for Chess-related programs are well developed.


The winning strategy is simple: Build an attack which should be away from it's horizon and let it conquer your "Queen side" (actually the opposite side where it's king has castled) or make a sacrifice of one or more pieces. Then the right time you should start your attack.

Here are 2 won blitz games against Gothic Vortex 1.0 (out of 40-50). The second is the most spectacular Gothic Chess game i have ever played(although blitz)! At one minute per game i had played only 11 games and i have +8 -3 =0.

Me Vs Vortex 1.0 -- 3 seconds per move:
1. f2f4 d7d5
2. g2g3 g7g6
3. c2c3 Bh8f6
4. d2d4 Ni8h6
5. h2h3 Nh6f5
6. Ag1h2 Ag8h6
7. e2e4 d5xe4
8. Bh1xe4 O-O
9. Ni1g2 Nf5d6
10. Be4f3 Bc8d7
11. g3g4 Bd7b5+
12. Kf1g1 Ah6i5
13. Ce1e3 Bf6g7
14. h3h4 Ai5j4
15. Ah2xj4 Bg7xj4+
16. i2i3 Bj4g7
17. i3i4 Nd6c4
18. Ce3e1 Bb5c6
19. j2j4 Qd8d6
20. h4h5 g6xh5
21. g4xh5 Qd6j6
22. i4i5 Bg7xi5
23. j4xi5 Qj6xj1+
24. Kg1f2 Qj1h3
25. d4d5 Bc6d7
26. Ce1i1 Qh3f5
27. b2b3 Nc4b6
28. h5h6 i7i6
29. Ng2h4 Qf5f6
30. Ci1j3 Ce8d6
31. Qd1i1 j7j5
32. Nh4xj5 Qf6g6
33. Cj3j4 Qg6c2+
34. Bc1d2 Bd7h3
35. Nj5h4 Bh3j5
36. Nh4xj5 Cd6xd5
37. Bf3xd5 Qc2xc3
38. Nb1xc3 Rh8g8
39. Nj5h4 Rg8g2+
40. Nh4xg2 Nb6xd5
41. Cj4j6+ Ki8h8
42. Cj6j8# 1-0

Me Vs Vortex 1.0 -- 3 or 10 seconds per move(i don't remember):
1. f2f4 d7d5
2. g2g3 g7g6
3. d2d3 Nb8c6
4. e2e3 Bh8f6
5. h2h3 e7e5
6. Bh1f3 e5xf4
7. g3xf4 Ag8h6
8. Ni1g2 Ni8g7
9. Nb1c3 Bc8e6
10. Ng2i3 O-O
11. Ce1g2 Bf6h4
12. Ag1e2 Ng7i6
13. Bc1d2 Ah6g7
14. d3d4 Bh4i5
15. Ni3j5 Ag7f6
16. Ae2d3 Ra8c8
17. Bd2e1 Bi5f8
18. Be1f2 Nc6b4
19. Ad3e5 Af6e7
20. a2a3 Bf8g7
21. Cg2h2 Bg7xe5
22. d4xe5 Nb4c6
23. i2i4 f7f6
24. e5xf6 Ae7xf6
25. j2j4 Qd8d7
26. Rj1j3 g6g5
27. h3h4 g5xf4
28. e3xf4 d5d4
29. Nc3e4 Be6c4+
30. Kf1g1 Rh8g8+
31. Ne4g5 Bc4e6
32. Kg1h1 Be6f5
33. Kh1i1 d4d3
34. c2c3 Ce8d6
35. Nj5i3 Cd6b5
36. Qd1d2 Cb5b3
37. Ra1d1 Cb3xd2
38. Rd1xd2 Af6e7
39. j4j5 Ni6g7
40. i4i5 Ae7g6
41. Bf2g3 Rc8d8
42. h4h5 Ag6f8
43. Ni3g2 Nc6a5
44. Ng2h4 Na5c4
45. Rd2d1 d3d2
46. h5h6 Bf5c2
47. Rd1xd2 Nc4xd2
48. Bf3g4 Qd7e7
49. Ch2i4 Ng7i6
50. j5xi6 h7xi6
51. Nh4xi6 Qe7e8
52. Ci4i3 Nd2f3
53. Rj3xj7 Rd8d1+
54. Ki1j2 Rd1d2+
55. Bg4i2 Rd2xi2+
56. Ci3xi2 Qe8j3+
57. Kj2xj3 Af8g6+
58. Kj3j2 i7xh6
59. i5xh6 Nf3xg5
60. f4xg5 Rg8e8
61. Ci2j4 Re8e2+
62. Kj2i3 Re2i2+
63. Ki3xi2 Bc2f5+
64. Ki2i1 Ag6h5
65. Cj4xh5 Ki8xj7
66. Ch5i7# 1-0

And finally what is this "odd bug" you're saying?

<don't forget that even a "baby PC-Chess programs of 1991-1992" running on a 2+ gigahertz processor will do "slightly" better than the same program running on the ancestor 16bit machine.

actually I don't know if the software has made that many advences. I think the early gnuchess versions aleready existed then, and all the essential algorithms were already developed. it would be interresting to see if the then software, compiled today and running on a temporary machine would be much weaker than its descendants.

yes Walter, I know. chess board is this way --->, computers board is that way. ---

A small test shows the obvious improvements:

Crafty 8.11 - Crafty 19.15______1-19 (2 draws)
Deep Fritz 8 - Fritz 1.20________20-0 !!!
Deep Fritz 8 - Fritz 5.32________18.5-1.5 (3 draws)

All are blitz games of 40/5'+40/5'+5'.

Fritz 1.20 played with DeepFritz8.ctg
Fritz 5.32 played with ChessTiger.ctg
All others with their own books and 5,4,3 endgame tablebases and 32 MB hash each.

but were they recompiled from source? optimisers can make big differences. if you use old binaries, on new machines, the tests aren't conclusive.

then, another thought: those are computer programs. that means, that they'll do the same things with the same input (random functions excluded). I think that even a small difference in computer strength would be enough to provide the sort of results you show. for example: say that chess1.0 has an elo of 1800, chess2.0 an elo of 1850. among humans, you'd expect results like 12-8; with computers results such as 20-0 aren't surprising.

a good test would be to let the 2 programs play against some humans with a comparable strength.

at ELO 2250: "most people want have the programs stronger..." I don´t think so. ;-) I don´t play gothic chess because normal chess would be too easy. ;-)

Two times the CPU time doesn´t make much difference, see the depth. My normal chess ELO is 1350-1400, maybe I still have to get more familar with the new pieces, but they really make it harder to think 6 half moves forward completely.

<>then, another thought: those are computer programs. that means, that they'll do the same >things with the same input (random functions excluded). I think that even a small difference >in computer strength would be enough to provide the sort of results you show. for example: >say that chess1.0 has an elo of 1800, chess2.0 an elo of 1850. among humans, you'd expect >results like 12-8; with computers results such as 20-0 aren't surprising.

Sorry but all these is simple nonsense!
If Progr-1 is only a little stronger than Progr-2 then a 20-0 is just impossible. And actually the results are just comparable with these of humans.
To be more specific:

Let's suppose that we have a database of computer Chess programs and a database of human Chess players. And after many games between the members of the 1st database against each other and the members of the 2nd database against each other, we establish an ELO classification for each database. And then we choose 2 programs(P1,P2) from the 1st base with ELO's A and B. And then we choose 2 humans(H1,H2) from the 2nd with ELO's A and B too.
Then according with ELO system definition, if a match between P1 and P2 has x% probability to end +w1 -w2 =w3, then a match between H1 and H2 has a x% probability also, to end +w1 -w2 =w3. The probability is the same or to reverse it: If the expected score between H1 and H2 is something then we have EXACTLY the same for P1 and P2 also. There is no reason that a small difference in computer's strength would provide different result than that of humans.

yes, elo rating is based on results, not on intellectual capacity. and engines even play very humanly.

Find the best move for black:
Black:
a7 b7 c7 f7 i7 j7
Kb8 Rc8 Rj8
Bh5 Nb4 Cd2

White:
a2 b2 e5 h2 i2 j2
Qh6 Nh3
Ka1 Rc1 Bh1 Rj1

Find a forced mate for white
whites pieces set up normally
Black:
e7 e5 d7 d6
Ce8 Qd8 Ke6 Rd5

To the one before: And why ? ;-)

I am just finishing my sweetest game for at least a year, against a stronger player who had more material, with my king attack over 20 moves (just thought as fun because I saw me losing), I have never managed something like that successfully in normal chess. I like the new pieces and combis with them more and more.

1st----------
Why not the simple 1...ixh6. Queen is lost, white has to resign.....


2nd----------
First of all this is not a legal Gothic Chess position (Meaning it can't be reached with valid play). But anyway here is my solution:

1.Ah3+ Kf7 {If 1...Kf6 then 2.Cf3+ with an unstoppable Mate in 6 (i checked every variation so i'm rather 100% sure)}
2.e4! with a Mate in 9 if i calculated correct(I didn't check everything, so a 70% possibility of corectness is my guess).
For example: 2...Cf6 3.Qj7+ Kg8 Aj5+ and the end is clear....

I received my order via mail today. 1.2 has more levels and looks better.

What about a thread about Gothic Chess on wikipedia.org ? Everybody may edit text. I started one on wikipedia.de today.

Well I hope you can still play Gothic Chess on here. You see, the Gothic
Chess Federation has been actively promoting BrainKing for a long time. All
of our printed materials contain screen shots of BK, most of our interviews
in newspapers and on TV mentioned BrainKing. But Filip banned Ed Trice from
here because of an argument he had with another member (who is very much
disliked by many people, myself included). They were both banned, a while
ago, but enough is enough.

The GCF will not stand by this ridiculous ban. Ed has asked Fencer to remove
the ban. Fencer said Walter has to. Ed asked Walter. Walter said he will not
override Fencer.

The entire executive committee of the GCF sent a letter to Fencer. He has
not acted on it.

So, members of this board, do you want Gothic Chess on here, or not?

If Ed Trice is not permitted to post on this board, it is deemed a request
to not want to do business with the GCF on here any more. Look at some of
these recent posts and questions. Ed can answer all of them perfectly, but
he is not permitted to comment at all.

Ridiculous.

If Ed is not permitted to post onto this board, the Gothic Chess license
will not be renewed for BrainKing. Is Walter the reason why Ed is not able
to post? Walter, remove the ban, or step down as moderator. Is Fencer the
one who is stopping everything? He has been contacted several times and he
knows the end result if this continues.

So, people, what do you want to happen?

Don't post here, send a message to Fencer and Walter.

Robert Colanzi
GCF National Tournament Director

I'm all for having all parties able to post again as long as they can behave and follow the rules. (it takes 2 to argue). But I don't think threats are the best way to go about it.

It sounds to me that Fencer is fine with letting Ed back able to post on here as long as it's OK with the board Moderator. But the board Moderator does not want to "override" the ban that was originally put in place by Fencer. (Sounds like a simple mis-comunication, and if Walter knows that Fencer does not see it as an "override" and Walter's decision, I'm sure Walter would take a look at the ban.)

I would love to see Gothic Chess stay here, but if Fencer and the playing community here has to stay under threat of removal and other crap - it may be time to just let the game go and move on to other more entertaining versions of Chess.

That is my opinion.

Again I want mention that Fencer can replace the game by a similar variation,for instance the "Aberg variation" of the Capablanca Chess.It is the same game with a different setup and it is not protected.

For this case I consider to get a patent for this variation with the name "Celtic Chess" and donate Bk a license forever:)

As I already said many times, Walter Montego is in charge of this board and it's up to him and only him to decide who should be banned/unbanned etc. I've also send him a message so he is aware of it.

Bring back Ed Trice!!!!!!
And keep Gothic Chess here. No alternative variation is equal to it!!!!!!

let Ed come back.

It's that simple.. besides, do you know all the hours involved just to bring a game on here.. is it really worth it??

Suppose it was you trying to endorse something.. how would it look to those prospective clients if you were made silent??!!

If he can play within the rules just like everyone else, that would be a good thing. But in my opinion, he should no way get any special treatment by being above the rules of the site. Again, my opinion.