Sam has closed his piano and gone to bed ... now we can talk about the real stuff of life ... love, liberty and games such as Janus, Capablanca Random, Embassy Chess & the odd mention of other 10x8 variants is welcome too
For posting: - invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu or for particular games: Janus; Capablanca Random; or Embassy) - information about upcoming tournaments - disussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted while that particular game is in progress) - links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)
Tartışma komitesi listesi
Bu komiteye yazı yazma izniniz yok. Bu komiteye yazabilmek için minimum üyelik seviyesi Brain Piyonu.
Grim Reaper: I would like to believe that never having suffered a loss in Janus while collecting a fair number of wins allows me the freedom to speculate that the game might be inherently easier to play from Black's perspective.
The above is much different from the:
White is also at a disadvantage by moving first in Janus
My opinion about Janus, although as like you, i dislike this game as it is too diagonal, is that it is well balanced, even though i have the same feeling -in a much lower degree- that black has something better.....
or evidence that the moon is NOT made out of green cheese. Can you give me an evidence for the opposite....?
Only if you transfer me into the moon you can convince me and this is quite difficult.....
I am on the live site waiting for a game of Gothic if anyone wants to play.
And congrats to Andreas for winning a blitz game in 10 with 12 second increment against me yesterday. I reached what I thought was a very comfortable position, and the tide of the game turned almost instantly. It was a bizarre sort of game, I will post it when the webmaster emails it to me and I annotate it.
Grim Reaper (17. Eylül 2005, 21:57:23) tarafından düzenlendi
Pythagoras:
Well, please send me your proof of the Pythagorrean Theorem, or evidence that the moon is NOT made out of green cheese.
What I stated was a belief based on my experience and I never offered anything more than that.
Mely holds close to an International Master title in chess, and is well-versed in Janus Chess also. I was down a Queen + 3 pawns vs. the Archbishop (Janus) while playing white because Black was able to run me out of good moves. It was like distance zugzwang. I was able to dispose of those pawns to get the draw, a difficult concept to realize. And, I was able to win with Black against Mely, again, a very tough competitor.
I would like to believe that never having suffered a loss in Janus while collecting a fair number of wins allows me the freedom to speculate that the game might be inherently easier to play from Black's perspective.
Grim Reaper:White is also at a disadvantage by moving first in Janus.
No i don't think so. I or you or anyone can not prove anything of cource, and i understand that this was just your opinion, your feeling, about the game, but the fact you feel that you have troubles with white while with black not, doesn't prove nothing.........
White is also at a disadvantage by moving first in Janus. I had a hard time drawing Mely as white, and a much easier time winning with Black. Tough to explain, but I just think white is practically in zugzwang in the beginning of the game.
mahavrilla:
Castling is different. It is done symmetrically. The a-side castling is written as O-O instead of O-O-O. As far as I know there are no patents on Janus. The representation of the Archbishop is replaced by a pointed dog, called Janus.
I happen to like both of these games. Does anybody know what the main difference is between these 2 games besides the chanceller in Gothic? Does anybody think one better than the other for any reason?
And the first person who wins a game against me on a Tuesday gets $50, but so far, no winners (although I had as little as 2 seconds on my clock when I checkmated one player.)
naughtypawn: After successful lobbying (not really!) it does no longer refer to a movie title but to a Cuban chess player (except for the rest of it, which, I suppose, was the trade-off, thanks to Grim Reaper!)
WhiteTower: I can´t believe what I read... A typo is a typo. I wrote Cablanca; it was a mistake without importance. I really know how Capablanca is written better than people that don´t speak Spanish...
I hope there is a way to save Gothic Chess for your site. For me it is the best game I know.
And I hope for more traffic on the live Site, it is wonderful to play this game live.
God bless you all
rabbitoid: I think after 48 hours, the hardware difference is negligible. The branching factor is such that almost any machine will get you to the same nominal depth. Say with all of your pruning tricks your software branching factor is 4, down from about 50 in the actual game.
That means if ply X completes at time T, ply X+1 requires 4T, X+2 needs 16T, X+3 64T, etc.
If the speed differential was a factor of 4, meaning one machine was 4 times faster than the other, even after 2 days, the faster machine would only outsearch the other by 1 ply.
I am sure Reinhard's hardware is within a factor or 2 of mine, maybe even less. I have a 2.8 GHz Pentium IV.
Time controls are 1 move in 48 hours (which is not going to be rigidly enforced if Reinhard needs extra time.)
If Reinhard accepts, diagrams will be supplied there so everyone can see the most current position.
I think this will be an interesting match. I would like to know how many nodes S.M.I.R.F. explores each move, what depth it reaches, and its evaluation.
Grim Reaper (13. Eylül 2005, 15:57:44) tarafından düzenlendi
naughtypawn:
Do you know how many people have paid to play a game of Gothic Chess, in the whole wide world, because of the patent?
0.
The patent has no bearing on an individual, a tournament director, or anyone else interested in playing the game.
It just prevents a company from saying "Wow there are 40,000 Gothic Chess players out there, let's capitalize on their hard work and make our own game and sell it."
You pay royalties for intellectual property every time you buy a DVD, download music (legally), or buy certain pots and pans.
Those who talk about having to pay to play Gothic Chess have absolutely no understanding of patent law. The only thing you need to do is buy a set, and you would have to pay for that anyway.
Seeing the discussion here on which would be better, GC or CRC, I think it is going into a wrong direction.
As far as I know GC has been created to have a very balanced 10x8 starting array based on the Capablanca piece set. CRC is randomazing starting arrays among a lot of possibilities. GC targets to be played by human beings, CRC was invented primarily to create a new testing field for computer chess programs. GC is about to organize experiences into an opening library, CRC is just about to avoid such looking up knowledge to be reproduced.
Therefore I regard CRC to need more sophisticated players, mainly because of the very different starting arrays.
It would be very preferable to have both, GC and CRC, at this site. But I have to agree that questions around patented games could be frustrating, even when such patents normally are not applicatable at all e. g. in the EU.
Chessmaster1000: Yes, you are right. Gothic Chess is a good game, but a game is not only the board and pieces. There are other things that influence the game. Imagine that I launch a standard chess club and I have to pay money to FIDE (or to the national organization) for the right to play in it... This restrict the possibilites of standard chess and, of course the possibilities of my club, and it would be horrible, in my opinion. Anyway, I prefer playing both games (CRC and Gothic Chess), but I think it is not possible...
For first you should know that everything i say, don't mean to offend anyone. It is just my opinion although many times seems offensive, but never is......
And second i don't take into consideration the patent thing, at all........I see only the game itself.......
As for the patent thing: Since you have to obey other laws at life -laws that other have voted- you have to obey the patent thing law too.....I don't see why this is bad.........
Chessmaster1000: Well, first of all, I can see the difference between a horse and a donkey. I am not stupid. Second, I believe that CRC is better because of a simple reason: the patent. I am a chess tournament director and I don´t have to ask for permission when I launch a tornament... Anyway, this is an opinion, like yours. I didn´t pretend to offend... I just wanted to write my point of view.
So i guess you would not see the difference between a horse and a donkey too......
I don't say that Gothic Chess is better from CRC (i believe that it is but this is too subjective), i only say that there is a huge difference between these two games........!
I can´t wait the day the Capablanca Random Chess will be available. Sincerely, I don´t see any differences between Gothic Chess and Capablanca Random Chess, except some pieces and a patent.
Grim Reaper: That's called "impossible" for the rest of us ...but the impossible is possible in Janus and Gothic. Small changes on the board open big possibilities. Good luck!
mahavrilla: You could buy 2 Gothic Chess sets ( ) and take the Archbishop out of each one. Or try a Grand Chess set, or a SuperChess set if overseas. Plunder a couple of standard sets and paint the bishops a silver color with fingernail polish, to distinguish them.
I don't get to play enough Janus to answer correctly, but I have gotten that feeling when I played. I would rather let my opponent go first and have the opportunity to weaken her/his position.
(sakla) If you only look at some of the discussion boards on a regular basis you can add them to your favourite boards list by going to the Board page and clicking "Add to my favourite boards". (pauloaguia) (Bütün ipuçlarını göster)