GameKnot: GameKnot related, What about a CONTINGENT MOVE? An idea ...

GameKnot related: What about a CONTINGENT MOVE? An idea ...

« Back to forum

Pages:

From

Message

baronderkilt
31-Aug-09, 20:00

What about a CONTINGENT MOVE? An idea ...

We have Conditional Moves now, where we can choose to add a reply to potential opponent responses to our move. Something I would like to see; similar in concept but a bit different ... so let me call it a Contingent Move. The idea would be that when it is our turn to move, we could program in a move to be made if for some reason we choose not to change it before our move time expires, but time does expire. In insurance feature against forfeit of one game.
***
Basically we could then put in the Intended Move based on our previous analysis, or best move we have found to date. But then be able to use more of our time to look for a better move (as Keres said). However, if for some reason we could not get to the board ...maybe just fell asleep with 5 hours left and did Not wake up! ...then we would not have to time forfeit that game, nor trigger an Emergency Postponement of ALL our games. Instead the Contingent move would then be made by the system. Or if we decided to go with the Contingent before time expired, just SUBMIT it as the official move as usual.
***
Maybe others don't have such a problem, but it has been for me. For instance finding I only have 7 hours left or even 12, I often feel it necessary to stay up late analyzing, for fear of oversleeping or some emergency coming up that would ruin that one game. You don't want to just make an O.K. move at some crucial point. Yet you don't want to risk forfeiting either, by having NO MOVE~!
***
And also, whenever a game gets into that Danger Zone of shortness of time, then when you Do stay up late and analyze it, you risk falling asleep at the board. And this Has happened to me. Fortunately, having a hardwood desk, it usually wakes me when my head hits the edge of it ... but there was a time too when a medical black-out cost me several games right when I was still at an undefeated Provisional state. Needless to say this cost me a rating being equal to what I was accustomed to. And having that happen, I decided this point in life was not the time to try to work up to a Master Rating again, here at GK, a game at a time. And so it became a strictly Fun proposition, having to give up the idea of ever trying to play with the top players here, while my game was still fairly strong. (I believe I should have Established about 2100 ish then) Later it deteriorated, and I'm probably where I should be at this time. But the point of all that is ... it seems to me that there can be real consequences to a player just from having such a thing happen, and that the Contingent Move idea avoids it.
***
Wondering what others think? Of course one could replace the contingent move at any point just be making a move like now, and it would cancel the Contingency. If it were felt that some delay or abuse might result from the feature ... players Never moving till the last minute
(as they are entitled, but can be inconvenient to others) then the Contingent Move feature could simply be limited in the number of times one could actually be activated in a given game. Perhaps two or three that actually activated for instance? What do you think of that too?

kingdawar
01-Sep-09, 00:55

Intended moves - put them in your "game notes". I would definitely be against the option.

baronderkilt
01-Sep-09, 01:08

HK ...

But the game notes will not make the move. Why would you be against the option?

kingdawar
01-Sep-09, 01:17

Because it makes that the full time WILL be used for each and every move. Not that there is something against that - as long as the player makes the move himself, just in time, over and over again.

myrydin
01-Sep-09, 03:55

Craig, I'm sure you suggested something similar a few years back? I liked the idea and a few other people did too, but more were opposed for reasons similar to that put forward by HK. Of course, that doesn't mean it's a bad idea (argumentum ad populum) but it's a democracy! I personally see no problem with it because people are entitled to use their full quota of time and it does not matter to me how they make their move, as long as they make it.

tactical_abyss
01-Sep-09, 19:16

This idea i'm going to mention is unlike baronderkilt's idea,but on some chess sites after a player makes a move he is able to a click on option to be able to ask the opponent if he can change his move to a different move!The opponent then can accept or decline.This must all be done before the the 2nd player makes a move even though the first players move was recorded.The first players clock is not reset and his time continues counting down from the first move he made.This is sort of a blunder recognition move with an option to correct...but only if the other player allows it.Helps,I suppose some of the lesser rated opponents.
I'm neither for or against this idea,but just thought i'd show you guys what exists on some other chess sites!

chessnovice
01-Sep-09, 21:26

Yeah, I do have to admit that I'm surprised "take-backsies" hasn't been implemented as an option yet. I sort of wonder why... whether it's a technical obstacle, a fear of abuse, or a combination of the two.

normbenign
03-Sep-09, 19:19

I like the contingent move idea......

as it is still a move entered by the player, and executed by the system if the player doesn't change it.

Not to keen on the do over, much like a mulligan in golf, where the player drives out of bounds, and tees up another without penalty. I teach youngsters to keep their hands on their knees under the table, until they are certain of their move. Touch move, always, release the piece and the move is complete.

What we generally do in skittles and can be done here if the blunder is grievous, count the game as won, and restart it in the before blunder position. That option is available after a timeout, but the loss counts. The loser after a blunder and resignation can request a new game beginning at the preblunder position. Of course the winner can accept of reject the challenge.

alic02
14-Sep-09, 09:49

like contingent moves

I like contingent moves because here can be all sorts of things that interfere with having the time to make a move. e.g. For the past three moths i have had intermittent access to the internet because my ISP has started to experience congestion in the area. I would like to be able to make contingent moves in case I get to my computer to make the move and cannot because my ISP is too congested.
Have now changed ISP and seems to have solved the problem.

Also I like takebacks where both agree at the beginning of the game that this can occur. But should only be for unrated games. I think it should be limited to beginners e.g. under 1300 and to games where there is a large difference between ratings - an experienced player is playing with a person much below them in rating. But not only one move.

Should be possible to click on a previous position, go back many moves and replay from there with the same player or a different player. e.g. with this game where I mistakenly thought around about move 12 that if I sacrificed I could bring about a checkmate. I know I can replay the moves, but I would like to be able to play it through with a person.

game

tugger
16-Sep-09, 05:35

I think it's a bad idea. Appreciated, people can use their time as they see fit. But this WOULD result in longer games, people would take advantage and place their contingent move, and leave the game until it's made, as there is no fear of time out.

Conditional moves were allowed in postal chess, with the goal of reducing correspondance. Contingent moves were not. Imagine sending your postcard saying "If you receive no more correspondance before by time runs out, please consider 7. 0-0 to be my move". I'd be thinking, "Why not just make the bloody move, if that's what you plan to do?"

sodiumattack
16-Sep-09, 10:58

Why not?

After all it is already possible to set up these contingent moves, by setting up that move as a
conditional move in answer of all possible (reasonable!?) move of your opponent. Ok, but is such
a waste of time...
Or does exist a limit of conditional "branch" you can set up (I don't use this
function often, but I remember you cannot set up more than 10 moves per opponent's answer)?

kingdawar
16-Sep-09, 11:44

Sodiumattack

Nowadays they are pretty much unlimited

omus
29-Sep-09, 01:08

yes

Good idea. And, yes, those players who like to stretch out games would use the option.
However, as we are frequently reminded in the forums, everyone is entitled to use all the time
allotted.

tugger
07-Oct-09, 21:49

I know everyone is entitled to use their time, I often take a week to move, but this would just encourage it more. I don't feel it would be in the spirit of the game, it'd just inevitably lead to one person getting annoyed with it after three moves in a row, and he'd do it back out of spite. Some games could take years, with childish sqabbling going on in the chat bar all the time.

I really don't like the idea. Hope GK hate it too.

hexs
11-Nov-09, 03:18

Against

True: People have the right to exhaust time. People with intermittent or occasional problems
would be benefited by "contingent moves" (I see it more like an "emergency move")

But: Usage of ALL the time shouldn't be encouraged. Not every measure that prevents an
unpleasant situation from happening is desirable, more so when an abuse of it would undermine
the spirit of gameknot chess. Therefore, I think it would take more than it would
provide.

The fun (and often stress) of gameknot is that you must manage to make moves in time (as
good as possible) in several games frequently without knowing neither (1) the exact time you'll
be able to log in again nor (2) if by then you'll have the response of a bunch of your
opponents waiting to be analyzed too. That forces you sometimes to perform a poor move or
even to timeout due to a lack of foresight (or simply because of an impossibility of having
anticipated a problem), but implementing "contingent moves" would be detrimental to the
game.

The main reason is that you wouldn't have to worry about (1), because gameknot would move
for you. By abuse of this feature I obviously mean systematically delaying games on purpose,
but we must also consider the fact that we humans are not usually 100% sure that the move
we're about to do is the optimal one, and so we could just leave the move there in standby,
as an emergency move to be made in case we don't analyze the game again.

The consequence is clear, fewer games would die of the flight-tendency of time, but games
would more likely live for ages. Think about how long a 40-game move would last! And
although we all have (or have had) opponents that use time to the limit (the entitlement of
which I reiterate), we don't want it as a general rule. Gameknot format allows a person with
about 20 games that logs in once a day to have about six moves to make, that's the fun of it.
The aim of healing an occasional illness cannot produce a permanent one!

So, I agree with HK that game notes should do the "deeper analysis" task, and as to prevent
timeouts through "contingent moves", I think we'd pay a heavy toll.

baronderkilt
11-Nov-09, 11:07

I think it is a partial misconception ...

At least concerning my own game management, it would be a misconception that having a contingent move would result in more time taken. Quite the contrary. Since NOW, if I had a game that would obviously require more analysis time than i had to give at the first look, I would simply postpone until I would have sufficient time guaranteed, and in the meantime ALL of my games would wait for that one. Whereas with a contingent move, I would put in the best of that session and hope to find more time available from sleep, work, Life or other Chess-interfering manifestations. It would help me avoid PP's in many cases, or might shorten them considerably.
***
True, of course, not everyone could say that, and I can respect that it would increase time consumption from some if they just "let things go" until their contingents moved, as a habit. And so it would make more time consumption from some. BUT, if a person is not making the contingent, planning to actually analyze more, but just out of laziness ... I don't think any highly rated player should need more advantage than seeing such an outlook in their opponent, to take away any concerns about not winning even if there are not time induced errors. Ya!?
Anyway, I know for me it would save time. Tho my perspective of seeing Chess as Art, and a search to play one's best game, gives me the outlook that "It takes what it takes" as far as time. And a brilliant game; well I've spent 14 hours of analysis on one move in Postal and over 50 hours many games. And I saw it as worth it, when the time to do it was there. But I don't dispute the validity of the other outlook, the Laskerian concept that "chess is a fight". And I think there is more concern for time then and games won. So that's okay. Or maybe I'm wrong on that.
***
But I do know it is still very Uncomfortable for me to make a Knowingly bad or insufficient move, even today as a "Chess for fun" player, and I tend to TimeOut or Resign if I don't find something of potential that suits me.
[So part of the problem there is clearly my own outlook. Surely some suffer similarly ?! Call me EASY, but i like to do my thinking before things fall apart when possible! ha ]
And I DO hate to TimeOut on someone. Tho it does not bother me if an opponent does )
***
I guess GK is not planning to do anything like this anyway tho, as far as I know. It seems a bit controversial. Whereas so Many players wanted Conditional Moves for a very long time before those came about. So I don't expect this to. But I would like to try it as a test if that was ever possible. I've never seen it done anywhere online.
}8-)

baronderkilt
11-Nov-09, 11:14

PS ... THANK YOU

For all the replies tho. I appreciate your opinions on this, and realize you may be right overall. But then I get to thinking; WHAT IF:
***
WHAT IF having a Contingent Move feature allowed GK to create FASTER TIME CONTROLS, like the much asked for "One Day per Move"?
Or what if this would allow something like, "Game in 1 day" or 10 days, whatever. It would seem that with Conditionals PLUS Contingencies it might be possible for a player to do something like that without being awake 24 hours, tho that would work for 1-DAY GAME?
And if the Contingency Move ONLY applied to say, games of 2 days permove or less? Or some such? (WHAT?)

hexs
12-Nov-09, 03:13

I'm trying, but still can't visualize it.

I'll start off by admitting a fact

If this "contingent move" feature was enforced games would gain quality (most probably),
unless players used it to simply delay games (which I agree is assuming a certain evilness in
players).

But still, the risk of setting a new feature is that you can't fully control the use of it that it will
be done. Some players - such as, I'm sure, yourself - would use them responsibly and would
make the game better. On the other hand, some players might misuse the feature, and
"contingent moves" have a high degree of "misusability". I don't see how conditional moves, for
example, can be abused, although I know for certain that some players feel they are rude (I
don't).

As per "1 day game", I really don't see how it would function. What would happen if at the end
of the day the game is not finished? Last one to move wins?

And admitting only the positive inputs of "contingent moves", I think it would change the
dynamic of gameknot. And this is something that I think must be thoroughly thought through
((try to say that out loud).

baronderkilt
13-Nov-09, 14:43

HI Hexs ... On the One Day matter ...

You got me there! It was last minute thinking & not well considered. Actually thinking, at that time, more of a game where both players would be agreeable, honorable etc, to making moves until finished. But considering it further, I'm sure it could be done electronically too.
**
I'm not a programmer, but it looks to me to be an awful Lot of work, to change the site to cope with a 1 day game!? It would have to be made so as to have a day for Each player, or else 12 hours each. The set up would need to be very similar to what is on some blitz sites. To either see when the player is not logged in and handle that like a "disconnected player" so as to not start their time until they logged back in, and run their time while they were on GK. Or else would need to handle it like a blitz "lag prevention" program that would only count their time from when they actually got the move, by being present at the game board, and subtract out any opponent time and transmission time.
The GK site already does seem to know "where we are" when we are on the mainsite, such as game boards. But does not always know we're here when looking at Forums or in Blitzing area. (To my understanding, the site is somewhat modular in construction.)
**
In either case, it looks like Conditional Moves could help quite a lot to keep things moving fast. But I'm not sure that the Contingents would be very helpful there, unless someone really needed to take a break while it was their move. And if they could set it to move if they were not back in a certain time. But that would be another addition to program. I still think it would be great fun, but perhaps not so practical for turn-based. And looks more like something for the new GK Blitz area if they did it. Just longer time than usual there.
**
I don't see how Conditional Moves could be abused either, as far as adding to length of game time. Certainly they only make it quicker
And I have to agree with you it Would make some players use more time. Others would use less. And I don't see how to compare the two without actually trying it out. So yes, it might be something of a gamble if the goal is to move games along.
It may be a trade-off and matter of priority. The strength of the idea should be in reducing TimeOut games. [Which many object to. Especially for Team Players.] Plus Time Forfeits do not add to the GK-database, since they are not included. And it would make a certain convenience for players like me that know they should not really be playing fast time controls. Ah well ... }8-))

baronderkilt
13-Nov-09, 15:06

OH yes ...

Again just wanted to mention the thought I had for a fix of the potential of players Always waiting for their Contingent to kick-in, as in the last bit of my original post. Which was this:
***
If for instance the system only allowed us to Set a Contingent Move perhaps 3 times per game?
***
Then only three moves per game might suffer more time from use of the full time control of that move. So a player would then only use Contingents when really in doubt about getting a move in (waking up, illness etc), but still not wanting to PP Everyones game.
***
I suppose there could also be a limit of how many games could use them. Maybe average no more than one contingent move per games completed so far that year!? 30 games or less for me. So I'd have 3 Contingents to use in 10 games.
Alternate limitation: Or just allow a total of 2 Contingents for every 20 moves made in a game?!

shamash
01-Feb-11, 20:51

a vote for contingent moves

Craig, yours is a wonderful idea, I agree with your rationale, I support your suggestion wholeheartedly, it would add to the fun of playing chess here, and I would find it useful in my games.

.

nathanman22
02-Feb-11, 08:42

agree

i don't see how contigent moves add any time to the clock and therefore am for them. . . . . The person still has to move within the time limits why does it matter if he sets it up ahead of time . . . As for take-backs i totally disagree. . . . .thats not real chess. . . . I just made a big mistake in a tournament game and i will face the consequences. . . . . Its part of the game. I view take backs as cheating. . . .even if the other person agrees if that person wins his rank becomes inaccurate. . . .he shouldnt have won. . . . But did because of take back moves. . . Highly illegal and unfair.

rocksham
04-Feb-11, 11:44

Disagree

I do not wish to see contingent moves. I think it would be a disaster...how many times have we seen threads on here about players taking their full allotted time each and every move when in a lost position. If this idea was implemented they would be rubbing their hands with a big smile on their faces.

nathanman22
04-Feb-11, 18:24

lost positions

are considerable subjective. . . . Take my tournament game . . . Mentioned earlier. . . I threw my queen and went down 7. Now since the game is not yet over i want no suggestions but i have a possibility to still win it. . . . Yet some would demand i resign. . . . Saying its a lost cause. I hate the argument that people stall in a lost position for two reasons. One i mentioned above. The other is that people automatically assume why people arent moving as fast. . . There are many reasons for stalling and most have nothing to do with intentional vicious intent. Even stalling to search for the best move is a higher possibility. Its nonsensical to assume intent and haughty and rude to assume a position is lost before it is.

nathanman22
04-Feb-11, 18:44

luckily

for every presumptious person here there are many reasonable ones. When i run into one who thinks i should resign i laugh and play on until he has proven it is useless to continue. . . . Then i gracefully resign. Usually these people are more talk than skill. . . . I only resign when i know i cant win and if i need to take my time to analyze a game i will. . . . I put my all into every game and play my heart out. Thats what i suggest to anyone. . . .take your time and dont give up. . . . . Its not over until you are either forced into checkmate or know you can't win or draw. . . Not when your opponent says its over.

nathanman22
05-Feb-11, 05:14

A good game to prove you should never give up. . . .

my 77th tournament game against jasperhw! Could someone please help me post a link? This game just proves its not over til its over. . . He didnt give up and in my carelessness, i threw my queen. . . But down 8 points in what some might have told me to resign. . . . I threw a checking situation leading to checkmate and he resigned! I would love help annotating this game with the title: never give up. Furthermore, this game won me the 77th tournament. If i had lost jasperhw could have won the whole thing. Thanks for your help! Never give up! This game is the proof!

myrydin
05-Feb-11, 06:21

game Gosh, what violence.

nathanman22
05-Feb-11, 06:58

thanks!

thank you myrydin!

tactical_abyss
05-Feb-11, 07:25

Never give up nathanman,its part of your learning curve to play on till the end.Consider it sort of like a tactical exercise.Sometimes it might be a mate in 3 or 6.Which river will your opponent take?Or will he blunder or time-out,especially if he has a big history of time-outs?
Maybe I can learn from this mate and make a mental picture of the position for next time?
I can give you a big list of players above 2200 that blundered or timed-out.Infact I research players game histories before I play them.With a player that has a big # of timed-out games,it is advantageous sometimes to play on in a drawn or even lost position!In many draw like positions(not dead draw)but probable draw like positions,many opponents,even on the master level become bored and take longer and longer to move.Its a psychology that backfires on them many times!They slow down in the hopes that I will agree to a draw.So they make a move an hour or so before their time runs out.Little do they realize that in life things happen...traffic jams,medical problems,girlfriends demanding you come over,the dog just died.So they time out!
Just put those points on top of my cake!Tastes good!

As to one day games,time zone differences ect.All I know is that other sites do it,so it is possible.

As to take back moves,it is also done on other sites.I'm not for it or against it,you guys decide.But if my opponent blundered in a rated game,you can be rest assured that I will say no to a take back!In an unrated game...ok,well probably.

TA

tradingfours
04-Jun-11, 05:38

Deleted by tradingfours on 04-Jun-11, 05:41.

Pages:

« Back to forum