| From | Message |
thumper
9/11/2006
19:21:26
[ report this post ] |
 Subject: Gameknot v FICGS discussion
Message:
It looks like there are some strong players over at FICGS but not many players in my weight class.
|
cairo
9/12/2006
00:14:58
[ report this post ] | Anyone
Message:
has a link to there website?
Bw.
Cairo
|
mateintwo
9/12/2006
00:55:09
[ report this post ] | I missed
Message:
a good part of the discussion.
My question is .. where is the game going to be played?
I might play if necessary, with my games unrated here on the gameknot server
Thanks
luca
|
miguel_pires
9/12/2006
03:47:00
[ report this post ] | hello Cairo /mateintwo
Message:
Cairo,
the website of ficgs is www.ficgs.com
Mateintwo,
intill now what GK organazer told me is that is going to be one game in this site (GK team with black) and other game in ficgs (GK team with withe)
Regard's
Miguel Pires
|
dewillget8
9/12/2006
12:39:26
[ report this post ] | Sounds like fun
Message:
Are you looking for 1200's casual players ?
|
tag1153
9/12/2006
17:47:01
[ report this post ] | Update for newcomers.....
Message:
We are in the initial stages of arranging a match vs. the FICGS website. Players of all ratings ranges are encouraged to participate, but please understand that there is no guarantee that you will be selected to play. We must be fair to the other site, and matches will be arranged according to the number of available players in each of 7 ratings groups (U2400, U2200, U2000, U1800, U1600, U1400, and U1200). The things that we have discussed so far are:
1) Each pairing will play 2 games - one on GameKnot and one on FICGS. We will play the white pieces on their site, and they will play the white pieces on ours.
2) We are striving for at LEAST 2 players from each class, so we are realistically expecting 14-20 players per side to participate.
3) When at all possible, pairings will be selected based on FIDE and/or USCF published ratings.
4) The time control issue is our biggest obstacle right now. Most of us here at GK play faster than our friends at FICGS. Where we are set up for 3d, 5d, 7d etc..., they tend to prefer 30d (and possibly longer) time controls. I have informed them that 14d is probably the max that we would prefer. While using identical time controls on both sites is ideal, we MAY have to compromise and use different controls on each site.
I hope this answers some of your questions, and I will keep everyone updated whenever I learn new info:)
tag1153
|
thumper
9/12/2006
18:14:57
[ report this post ] | Tag
Message:
The longer time controls would suite me better so that's not a problem. The concern for me is the rating. From what I've seen, they have only a few active players in the U1800 class.
|
fmgaijin
9/12/2006
22:40:51
[ report this post ] | 30d Time Control means 30 days for 10 moves
Message:
(Not 30 days per move!) It's the standard correspondence time control--we played IECC with the same control. Your left over time accumulates, so if you make the first 10 moves in 10 days (on YOUR clock), then you carry over 20 days to the next 10 moves/30 days. It is a bit slower than MOST players on GK, but I've had 5 days/move games where my opponent used all 5 days on EVERY move.
|
ccmcacollister
9/13/2006
01:13:16
[ report this post ] | TAG > > >
Message:
I was wondering about any idea for an approximate start date; the main Question here being how the Holiday Season will be handled so as to avoid problems from the travel and time off some people traditionally do around then. Have there been any thoughts on that?
In Postal they often would have a period of moritorium on time complaints during that time since mail would slow down and become more unpredictable, as well as the various activities and time away from Chess that players would engage in. Will both sites simply be entered onto the other as new accounts and utilize whatever Postponement/Vacation features might exist there?
If some games are played at a 10/30 Postal-type time control (or worse yet, a 14 day ... which could literally last over 5 years with PP of GK length!) then those could easily take over a year to play out some endgames. (Since Postal games of 10/30 were known to go 18 to 24 months at times. Even tho transit time was involved there, and not here, still it looks like over a year could be very possible in some. And Postals generally then had a Adjudication option after that time, unless an extension was sought and granted.) Any thoughts or discussion of such yet?
Regards, Craig
***
PS... Great match idea Tag. But I've got you figured out ... You are looking for a lot
more great games to annotate, aren't you !
|
tugger
9/13/2006
08:00:31
[ report this post ] |
Message:
so would we need to sign up with their site in order to play our game as white? and vice versa? or are there ways around that planned?
|
tag1153
9/13/2006
18:55:35
[ report this post ] | tugger
Message:
We will need to register on their site. No prob though, as it is a free site:)
tag1153
|
lucasbeauchamp
9/14/2006
08:39:09
[ report this post ] | Which rules prevail?
Message:
from their "terms and conditions":
11. 1. Netiquette
Computer assistance is authorized, as any other kind of help.
|
tag1153
9/14/2006
19:34:43
[ report this post ] | UPDATE:
Message:
OK - I have some news to report......(in no particular order:)
1) The sign up deadline for consideration is OCTOBER 1, 2006.
2) PLEASE understand that not everyone who wants to participate can do so. We have a MUCH larger community than FICGS, and we must be fair with the number of pairings and the ratings associated with them.
3) The FICGS rep and I have come to an agreement that the time controls will be set at 10 days per move with 3 days added after each move. The maximun "time bank" will be set at 14 days.
4) In the interest of speeding up the process and cutting down on the "why wasn't I chosen" discussion that I'm sure will ensue, I will be seeking the advice of a few trusted GameKnot veterans to help me choose our team. I'm not going to name these players publicly. If you are one of them, I'll message you privately.
5) The match is tentatively scheduled to begin around October 14. Our team will be set around October 7, giving our players a week or so to register on FICGS, and their players a chance to register here.
6) As mentioned earlier, each site will play the black pieces "at home" and the white pieces "on the road".
7) As for the big question regarding computers, databases, etc.... - the rules of CC that we all know and love here at GameKnot will be the rules used for this match. The FICGS rep will be explaining our rules to his teammates, and we can only hope for honorable adherence. The LAST thing in the world I want to get mired down in is heated debates about "cheating". Understand that our opponents have just as much right as we do to be concerned. In the event of suspected abuse, the FICGS rep and I will jointly arbitrate any problems. Sorry folks, this is the ONLY aspect of this match that the FICGS rep and I claim as executive priveledge.
More to come, so stay tuned:)
tag1153
|
honololou
9/14/2006
20:01:34
[ report this post ] | are both games…
Message:
to be played simultaneously? If not, this match could last a very long time.
|
tag1153
9/14/2006
20:14:56
[ report this post ] | honololou
Message:
yes - both games will be played simultaneously...........
|
thumper
9/14/2006
20:35:12
[ report this post ] |
Message:
Will our GK names be available over there, and theirs here?
|
miguel_pires
9/15/2006
03:15:53
[ report this post ] | hello
Message:
tag1153 and all gameknot users that want to play against Ficgs, i've this question: tablebases are considerated like a database or not?
regard's
miguel pires
|
tag1153
9/15/2006
15:34:19
[ report this post ] | NOTICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Message:
This message is aimed at all players interested in playing in the match vs. FICGS:
While I am abundantly proud and happy for all of the interest shown by our expert and master level players, we simply MUST HAVE more lower rated players sign on! I am seeking more class A, B, C, and D level players. The intent of this match is to provide a wider sampling of skill level to our opponents. While it would of course be satisfying to crush them by playing our masters vs. their novices, it just wouldn't be very sporting. So come on you patzers, sign on and give us some more options:)
Thanks,
tag1153
|
thumper
9/15/2006
17:37:32
[ report this post ] | Frankly
Message:
I'm getting a bit intimidated myself with all these heavy hitters milling around, and they're on my team! Ficgs has been served!
|
tag1153
9/16/2006
14:48:34
[ report this post ] | My last message to FICGS:
Message:
I just wanted to give you guys a heads up as to the players from my site that are being CONSIDERED for playing in the match. As ratings fluctuate, I have simply rounded and given approximate strength:
mateintwo - 2400+
cyrano - 2400+
cairo - 2300+
fmgaigin - 2300+
drdesoto - 2300+
papani - 2300+
harlekin - 2300+
nestorix - 2300+
drunken_rabbit - 2200+
kumpan - 2200+
grandpatzer - 2200+
os5213 - 2200+
carlosmart - 2200+
chrisp - 2100+
nottop - 2100+
gloomy_den - 1900+
thumper - 1700+
gwalchmai - 1600+
tugger - 1600+
yanm - 1500+
mattw - 1500+
patagusto - 1500+
tag1153 - 1400+
cjjpeterson - 1400+
simian9 - 1400+
eqj2 - 1400+
hollcanna - 1300+
dewillget8 - 1200+
mozz - 1200+
These GameKnot players have expressed an interest in playing. More will sign on I'm sure, as I have set Oct 1, 2006 as the sign up deadline. I will put together our team during the first week of October, and will be ready to commence play by the second week of October. During the interim, Thibault and I will finalize the details of the match. I realize that this short list is very master and expert heavy, but have no worries - I will be contacting more of our A, B, C, and D class players and asking them to participate. We look forward to the match:)
Thomas
|
tag1153
9/18/2006
04:08:29
[ report this post ] | Here is the latest.......
Message:
In the FICGS forum, there seems to be a concern that we here at GK have a high percentage of players who who use computers to make our decisions as to moves. Here is my last message on their forum:
I am a little concerned, yet understanding, of your feelings about the possibility of cheating in our proposed match. Please understand that there are two sides to the suspicion coin. For those of you who are not familiar with the GameKnot website, let me assure you that I will only be putting up players who I am familiar with, and who have proven themselves to play honorably. I am a three year veteran of GameKnot, and play on the site daily. I will be selecting my team from players whom I feel confident will conduct themselves within the rules we agree on. The intent of arranging this match is NOT to simply put up all of our master level players and attempt to whitewash you guys 100-0. The intent is to provide as MANY matches of ALL ratings ranges for a fun, competetive match. If we lose every match we will have no hard feelings towards you. As the game results in our proposed match will have no bearing on ratings changes, we view the match as a simple, friendly exercise. So, having said all of that, we hope that FICGS will offer up as many people as possible, and Thibault and myself will pair them with my guys in such a way that is FAIR and equitable to both sides. Should anyone here at FICGS have any questions, please feel free to post them here or in the GameKnot forum (in the GameKnot Related threads). Thanks:) - Thomas
Just so everyone here at GK knows, our team will be selected based on the basis of rating continuity. Those players who have extreme fluctuations (of say, 500 points or more) will not be selected. I will approve/decline their players, and Thibault (the FICGS rep) will do the same with the players we elect. It appears to me that FICGS is far more concerned with ratings manipulation than we are, so we must be transparent to avoid even the merest suggestion of impropriety.
tag1153
|
mattdw
9/18/2006
09:01:40
[ report this post ] | Quote: Mateintwo
Message:
"a post I read in their forum
Dirk Ghysens (2006-09-18 10:33:56)
Not all, Henri
I know of two exceptions: 1. Yelena Dembo, FIDE rating 2466, WGM, IM, and a GM norm; rating at Gameknot 1775; 2. Marius Ceteras, FIDE rating 2427, FM (he missed IM title due to a strange decision by FIDE officials), very well-known correspondence chess personality, chess publisher, organiser etc.; rating at Gameknot 1740 (not in top 2000 there and loses regularly against 1800 rated patzers). Unfortunately Yelena Dembo is no longer playing at Gameknot; they threw her out. Also Marius Ceteras has no ongoing games there during the past month. So you may be right after all: most players above 1600 are using a chess engine (except the WIMs, WGMs, FMs, and IMs rated below 1800), and certainly all players above 1800 (with one possible exception, a WIM from Holland/Russia, who managed a rating slightly above 1800, but she got thrown out also, for being a nuisance). BTW, it boggles my mind why the use of tablebases is allowed there; unlike engines, tablebases tell you the perfect move to play and what the outcome will be with 100% certainty.
If people from there think before starting the match and without having even never signed up on gameknot.com ... then I think it is not interesting to play agaist such a site ...or , at least, I'm not interested in it."
That really is quite a bizarre thing for him to say, and quite an accusation too! Maybe I'm naive but I really don't think the problem is as prevalent as he claims. I think he has missed a quite an important point regarding Yelena's rating, she had not played many games, none of which were 2000+ rated players. She had in fact won 38 and drawn 2 out of 40, her only loses coming from the timeouts before she disappeared. I don't think anything conclusions can be drawn from her GK rating and most certainly it cannot be used as evidence to suggest that somehow almost all GK players above 1800 must use chess engines!!!
Why would people want to use engines to select their moves? What would the fun in that be? I play chess because I enjoy it and like improving - chess engines do not fit into the equation for that other than for post game analysis. I'm not too far off 1600 now and hopefully will break that barrier in the not too distant future but that doesn't mean I will suddenly have to start using engines to compete - I don't use them now and I won't use them in the future!
|
thumper
9/18/2006
12:33:59
[ report this post ] | Tag
Message:
I just visited FICGS and read the forum coments relating to the match. A couple of things come to mind.
1) Why aren't their potential players publicized as we are here? This gives my potential opponent (if I'm selected to play) weeks to study me before the match, but I have no clue about him/her.
2) The accusation that all of our over 1600 players are letting chess programs move for us by using chess engines is just silly and insulting on so many levels.
|
tag1153
9/18/2006
12:59:35
[ report this post ] | thumper (and all)
Message:
Thibault sent me an e-mail listing the players they have that want to play. While no selections or pairings have been finalized yet, here is their list of players:
1. Thibault de Vassal - 2300+
2. Glen D. Shields - 2200+
3. Don Groves - 1700+
4. Miguel Pires - 2000+
5. James Stripes - 1700+ (but possibly much higher)
6. Julien Baudement - 1100+
7. Ilmars Cirulis - 1200+
8. Peter Willoughby - 1600+
9. Richard Grady - 1500+
10. Phil Cook - 1100+
Supposedly, more players from their side are wanting to play as well, but I don't know who they are yet.
tag1153
|
ccmcacollister
9/18/2006
17:35:49
[ report this post ] | See mateintwo comment in other Thread
Message:
About that posting mateintwo quotes; it seems to me that both clubs are about the same situation as far as that goes re computer analysis. Many here have used it to postmortum or generate pre-game analysis (as many Authors seem to anyway)
but we dont allow computer use, and say we wont use them in the match.
THEY
say they wont use them in the match, but DO ALLOW them on their SITE; THUS
they no doubt are chock full of computer postmortums AND prior game computer uses within their d-bases or opening trees, etc. Everytime then that they use notes from even one of their past games, they will be using computer analysis! What difference there ??
***
Also, in response to them ... I have not used any programs for Play, Post-mort, nor
pre-mort as it were :) Yet would be over 1800 if not for dozen+ Equal to Won games Resigned way back, and a half dozen lost by T/O during Provisional Rating due to blacking out online here. And I think they better add fmgaijin , bogg ,
malrod , ilovechess , justus500 , from just my personally known 'locals' on GK, being over 1800 but not letting computers play their games. I could add more from, and no doubt near a 100 @ GK from elsewhere who would also not fit their accusation; just speaking of those of whom I would be certain. (So no offense intended to those of you above whom I just do not know closely)
***
Therefore the accusation levelled at GK players seems most "uninformed" to me. If they would like, then lets just add a section for ratings made before 1990 when computers were patzers ... but strongest there vs strongest here regardless of rating for that section ?!
***
|
nottop
9/18/2006
19:33:19
[ report this post ] | a posting
Message:
The accusation of cheating for Gameknot players appears to me to be just an individual posting in a forum.
I am attempting to set up an account at ficgs to respond to the posting - but in any event -
If this is the opinion of one player, freely expressed in a forum, should this be of concern to players here?
Would anyone here like to be hold gameknot officially responsible for all the postings at the forums?
Don't recall some of the silly things said here in forums?
I suggest gameknot players simply ignore this silly posting and get on with the event. The fact there is a silly posting in a ficgs forum simply shows the freedom of players their to voice their opinions (however stupid).
Matches like this will allow good correspondence players an option to organizations like the iccf. Don't kill it because somebody says something silly.
|
tag1153
9/18/2006
21:05:36
[ report this post ] | Thank you nottop......
Message:
........I whole-heartedly agree. I would ask that GK players refrain from posting in the FICGS forum until after the event has begun - simply to avoid any silly flames being generated.
Thanks,
tag1153
|
honololou
9/18/2006
22:49:59
[ report this post ] | the difference is…
Message:
when someone says something "silly' like that in our forums it is not tolerated—by the players or
by the management. I read the post in question in the FICGS forum and what struck me was that
no one challenged the poster of those ridiculous, unsubstantiated claims.
|
ccmcacollister
9/18/2006
23:11:27
[ report this post ] | nottop
Message:
As honolulu says, no one there challenges those remarks in their forum. So it seems to enjoy some agreement, or at least lack of opposition to the viewpoint? And if that leads to further (perhaps already present) discouragement to their roster building, then perhaps IT IS the thing that will kill the match. As it is now, we already will have a lot of good players being dissappointed about not playing.
***
So it does seem a major concern to me, and I am glad to see Tag addressing it as such with them and us. He makes an excellent point about the structure of the match. Surely considering what we give up by seeking rating equivalence for the event, rather than strictly Best vs Best (Even if we only sent our best with high pre-computer ratings and otb titles or Experts+ or similar reassuring gesture there) it should say something about Intent in the match. And I would hope that it might even be coming across as a Goodwill Gesture.
I look forward to hearing more from him about how it is working out. And if those they have playing are not concerned with that issue. From the sound of things they seem to have been stressing it greatly tho, for some reason.
|
lucasbeauchamp
9/19/2006
05:29:08
[ report this post ] | This looks like a challenge
Message:
Sorry about the garbage text (I used google to find their forums, as I'm not a member there). This posting appears to challenge the unreasonable accusation:
<link>
-> www.ficgs.com
</link>
−
<description>
Of course cheating is always a danger, but I doubt more than a small minority of players do it. Chess appeals to those who enjoy solving problems more than to those who need to maintain a artificial number (rating) alongside a fictitious name. Cheaters likely lose interest fairly quickly. I've played at GameKnot and many similar sites. If any more than a half-dozen of my 300 or so opponents were cheating, they were doing so badly.
</description>
To be perfectly honest, eschewing post-game computer assistance seems far more silly than the fear that many or most internet chess players cheat. Lots of people I know do not play on the internet because they believe cheating is rampant. An IM of my acquaintance (one of the top players here) told me that he no longer plays in GameKnot tournaments because he thought there were several cheating against him when he did. OTOH, computer analysis of a game after the fact offers a few more lines to an existing game, but hardly resembles using an engine to generate moves.
Suppose your database contains 2 million human games and 8 million computer games. These are still an insignificant fraction of the 10^120 possibilities through the first forty moves.
|
thumper
9/19/2006
18:42:36
[ report this post ] | Current news from 'over there'
Message:
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 14:40:42)
match GameKnot-FICGS
That is the case. GameKnot players who already registered will play under their real name.
Now, there are 12 players in FICGS team.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 15:03:13)
Computer use on GameKnot......
I just read GameKnot forum about the FICGS vs. GameKnot match :
It seems to me this question of computer use on GameKnot is quite out of topic (and on the wrong forum)... I proposed to GameKnot rep (Thomas) to prohibite any computer assistance (engines + databases) for the match or to simply authorize it, as I think more players from FICGS would play, and surely players from GameKnot too... Then everyone is free to play, accepting the rules and the risk of cheating (quite small IMO), but it's up to I & Thomas to deal with that. This debate shouldn't happen here IMHO.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 19:13:07)
No cumputer use at all
Thomas & I finally agreed to prohibite chess engines & chess databases for this friendly match ! :-)
Games should be really interesting this way.
|
tag1153
9/23/2006
03:19:18
[ report this post ] | 7 DAYS LEFT TO SIGN UP:
Message:
Only one week left! If you want to be considered to represent GameKnot, sign up NOW!
tag1152
|
ccmcacollister
9/23/2006
18:38:05
[ report this post ] | imo, Great Idea ...
Message:
Playing with real names. I always enjoyed knowing who I was playing. And desperately burning the midnight oil, searching for an opponent's past games.
**
Rejoicing to find two or three games, back in pre-d-base Postal Chess.
Now its like a bonanza when you can type in a player at a d-base and get 5, 10, or 1000 games :)
And of course, in a little edge GK gives to the FICGS gents, most GK players have an ample selection of games published onsite in their history. But that edge doesnt bother me when I think of the joy some happy player will have researching Tag's 5022 games ... desperately trying to finish by November .... }8-)
|
ccmcacollister
9/23/2006
18:39:42
[ report this post ] | Sorry ...
Message:
Lost my head again . . . Ouch! }8-)
...thats better
|
thumper
9/23/2006
23:59:19
[ report this post ] | Ccmcacollister
Message:
I've done some research into my potential adversary's past games...
Their site isn't as well crafted as GK but you can get the games. I haven't looked beyond their site but I may if he and I are confirmed opponents.
|
bunta
9/24/2006
00:25:13
[ report this post ] | I would play
Message:
I would play but like, can this game finish within a month or so? my rating is U1800, im just here to say good luck to the gameknot representatives!
|
tag1153
9/28/2006
04:29:57
[ report this post ] | UPDATE:
Message:
With three days left before the sign up deadline, I am still in need of an 1800 level and one more 1100 level player. I have begun the process of pairing players, and it appears that we will have a 12 vs. 12 match vs. FICGS. I wish it could be more, but they are a much smaller community. I want to go ahead and apologize in advance to those of you who want to play but are excluded. I will keep you in mind should we decide to play another match vs. some other site. I will be announcing the GameKnot representatives and their opponents during the first week of October. I encourage those of you who have expressed interest to go ahead and set up a free account on FICGS (to expedite the process should you be selected). Stay tuned for more details:)
tag1153
|
bunta
9/28/2006
21:21:57
[ report this post ] | 1800 level
Message:
ccmcacollister has conviced me to play, my current rating is 1775 and average rating is about 1746, I dont have a fide nor a USCF rating. My national rating under Australian system is 1021 but I have not played that (over the board chess) for almost a year now, so here I am applying to represent gameknot for the U1800 section. May I ask what happens if my rating exceeds 1800?
|
bunta
9/28/2006
21:38:07
[ report this post ] | time control
Message:
what is the official time control? or is it to be announced?
|
mattdw
9/29/2006
07:15:11
[ report this post ] | Thumper
Message:
How did you get access to the games? I had a quick browse but couldn't see them.
|
gwalchmai
9/29/2006
07:37:54
[ report this post ] | There might be a quicker way
Message:
but the way I got there myself was to click on the rating list, then on the country flag of the player I was interested in. This got me to another list of players but in this list the players' names themselves were links and by clicking on them I got access to all of that player's last games.
|
thumper
9/29/2006
11:40:44
[ report this post ] | Mattdw
Message:
I followed the path that Gwalchmai describes. It only takes a couple of clicks to get to the games so I haven't looked for a shorter path.
|
mattdw
9/29/2006
11:57:14
[ report this post ] | Ta.
Message:
Thanks, gwalchmai/thumper I will have a good look at the games of potential opponents before the match.
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
Please log in to your account to play chess online!