[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by jejujeju
Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]As I mentioned in a comment a week or two ago, I'll have unpredictable internet access from Sept 22 to Oct 8. I had hoped that I'd have made enough moves in my first round of games (or even finished them) to bank enough 'extra' time to not have any time expiration issues. As the games haven't started yet, I'm a little concerned that I might get dealt games the day I leave and not even know about them until they are finished due to time expiration. If there is any way to sort this out (like a bye in round one or unlimited time in round one games) it'd be greatly appreciated. If not, I understand and will accept my fate. Thanks. J
Thank you very much. I will repost when I return. Good luck, all.
I'm back to having regular internet access. Feel free to schedule me for any games at any time. Thanks.
Get the next round started, for crying out loud. Jeremy has 23 active games, is averaging one single move every 4 days in his first round game, and wants to play one game at a time. Estimated time of completion of the tournament? Let's see, 19 games times roughly 2 months ... summer of 2010? My proposal (Proposal '2 every 3') Rounds 2 and 3 should commence by the end of May, with 2 new rounds beginning every 3 weeks. That'll get this thing wound up near the end of the year. All are welcome to refrain from playing in other games (or at least fewer than 23 other games) if unable to find time to focus on their tournament games. Let's play 2! Support proposal 2 every 3!!
Juan Rodriguez, you are both right and wrong. Mr. Jeremy Good does face you in his next round. However, your next round match is actually against Uri Bruck. Your match vs. Jeremy Good is your 3rd match. It may be possible for you to play both the match versus Uri Bruck and the match versus Jeremy Good at the same time, if it is agreed that we can handle more than one match at a time. Vote yes on Proposal 2 every 3!
Jeremy, you're right, you did agree to be playing 2 games at a time from and after June 15th. But still, at the pace it's going, we're looking at sometime in 2009. Maybe I'm just a little anxious to play b/c I got thrashed in a short number of days in my first round game. Vote Yes on Proposal 2 every 3!
Proposal 2 every 3! goes out to all participants. The hope is that with enough support the games will get rolling beyond round one. The reason no 2nd round games have commenced is unknown. While it may (incorrectly) appear that Jeremy Good's preference for finishing his first round game before starting his second round game was holding up the commencement of the second round, that is clearly not the case. He simply and fairly made a request. Though using his request and projected rate of completion as an example for why to support Proposal 2 every 3!, I didn't mean to single him out or blame him for the lack of progress in this tournament. If it was read that way by anyone, I apologize. I imagine that Fergus is the person who clicks the button that sends out the game invitations, so ultimately this is designed to get his attention.
I hereby withdraw Proposal 2 every 3! Appreciate the support from all who backed it, but reality shows that it wasn't to be... While conceding, it isn't the loss that is so bothersome...it's losing to no alternative. On a serious note, has anyone had any contact from Fergus in the past 5 + weeks? It seems that the tournament is at a standstill because he hasn't kicked round two into gear. If that's because he's busy at work and with the new girlfriend (perhaps even fiance or wife at this point), and with her children (who may be his now as well)...that's outstanding for him, and I support family time over chessvariants time. What gives me pause is that in the recent past when that was the case he popped in to at least mention it. I'm hoping to hear from one of you, anyone, that you've been in touch with Fergus and he's well but busy. Hoping Fergus is busy enjoying his life, and hope to hear from someone that this is the case. Jeju
Does anyone know how to see the current standings for Game Courier Tournament #3? Thanks.
2007-2008 Chess Variants Design Contest. Chess variant inventors gather round! We're doing it again! Exact nature of contest to be determined with YOUR help!![All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I support conceptual and propose additional subcategories: a) historical b) sci-fi c) geographical
Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]A) I like number 1. B) I have no problem with number 2, but imagine it would take a couple weeks to sort out who's in/who's out and then set up a schedule. C) How'd I do in the 'trial match-up' vs. carlos? Let's play!
*All those players who are willing to re-start CV Game Courier Tournament #3, please comment here now.* I'm willing to re-start. Agree that if only 7 or 9 original players are active, makes more sense to start fresh.
Per Jeremy's request, I have conferred with Juan Rodriguez. He is in.
Carlos is slipping ... must be all the extra duties he's taken on in association with the tournament...thanks for your efforts and sacrifice!
Jeremy, keep playing me (and beating me) and you'll likely find yourself on the board!
Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Great, excited for a new set of games. Oh, and I'll happily take those 6 W's in order to jazz up the winning percentage!! Again, thanks for the time and effort, Carlos.
Great!! Just what I need, an extra motivated Joe Joyce to dismantle me in under 10 moves. Thanks, Carlos. Really. Thanks.
Voidrider Chess. A 43 square variant with movable spaces. (7x9, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Yes. In Fergus' demonstration game seen on the voidrider page, move 39 has a voidrider put the opposing king in check when there is a void between them. If the voidrider were not able to capture after passing through the void, this wouldn't have been check.
Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]David, Appreciate the time and effort you put into posting rankings. I think most regulars on this board are somewhat competitive and also like to see the rankings. I'm very pleased to see my team on a board for the first time ever, though the particular end of the board on which we reside wasn't our first choice. Of late, there has been discussion of some of the 'vintage' variants. I've also noticed an acute interest in vintage games that have been rated, as they seem to be more seriously contested. Out of curiosity, is there any way to isolate rated, vintage games played in the last 365 days and see what the rankings are for that? If so, would love to see the results.
Thanks David, I was more interested in all rated games from the group of games deemed 'VINTAGE' in the past 365 days, the results of which are as follows: Name Userid GCR Percent won GCR1 GCR2 je ju jejujeju 1564 1.0/1 = 100.00% 1564 1564 Hans Henriksson hasurami 1548 1.5/2 = 75.00% 1548 1548 darren paull ramalam 1451 0.5/2 = 25.00% 1451 1451 juan rodriguez rodriguez 1435 0.0/1 = 0.00% 1435 1435 ...and was interested because it's the only way my enthusiastic yet not very skillful abilities will ever find the top of any rankings... Thanks.
As all of the Game Courier Tournament #3 games scheduled between active players have been assigned, and all unfinished games are currently being played, it shouldn't be too long before the tournament is finished and a player other than myself is crowned champion. In an attempt to overcome the inevitable let-down associated with the conclusion of such a grand event, I think the steps for setting up Game Courier Tournament #4 should begin. I propose that each participant choose one game that will be played in the tournament. This will allow the tournament to start shortly after participants commit, hopefully avoiding long delays which tend to result in players losing interest, dropping out and leaving a bunch of dead games. If you would be interested in playing such a tournament, please leave word in this thread. (*If I'm out of line by proposing this as a mere member of the group, please excuse and ignore...)
Absolutely correct, no need to make it the GC tourney 4. I suggest/propose... 8 players, 8 games. Each player designates a game they want to have in the tournament. Once the 8 players and games are known, there will be a one week period in which any participant may veto a suggested game. That game will be replaced by any other game chosen by the person who orignally chose the game that got vetoed. The replacement may not be vetoed by anyone. Once the games and players are known, the players will be put into two groups of 4. The groups will be determined by current rankings. Among the 8 participants, pool A will include the players with the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th rankings. Pool B will have 2,4,6,8. Player 1 will play Player 3, Player 5 and Player 7 in the game Player 1 brought to the tourney, as well as the game their opponent brought to the tourney. Same format for Pool B. Each player will be involved in 6 tournament games simultaneously. Time setting will be a pace of 4 moves per week, same as the GC Tournament 3. 1 point for a win, 0 for a loss, .5 for a draw. At the conclusion of the round robin, top 2 from each pool will create a winners pool, and the bottom 2 from each pool will form a losers pool. The same format for round 2. After that, the top two in the winners pool will each nominate 2 of the games that were brought to the tournament and play each other in those four games to determine the champion. This could also be done between the bottom 2 of the winners pool, the top two of the losers pool and the bottom two of the losers pool. The total number of entrants need not be restricted to 8, and any multiple of 4 would be fine with this format. If the number were 10, pools of 5 possible but that has each player playing 8 games at the same time and that could be a bit much. If there is any interest in this sort of tournament I'd be happy to organize it, but would need someone to do the tech bits (assigning games, putting up charts and stats and that sort of thing. ex: Player Game Elvis Alice Chess Aretha Time Travel Chess Ray Omega Chess Janis Janus Chess Karen Korean Chess Snowman Falcon Chess Horse Crazyhouse Joe Joyce Anti-King Chess Aretha uses veto to eliminate Janus Chess. Janus replaces it with Cannons of Chesstonia. Player Game Elvis Alice Chess Aretha Time Travel Chess Ray Omega Chess Janis Cannons of Chesstonia (replacing Janus) Karen Korean Chess Snowman Falcon Chess Horse Crazyhouse Joe Joyce Anti-King Chess With the help of David Paulowich, it is determined that over the past 365 days, the players rankings fall in this order: 1 Joe Joyce, 2 Elvis, 3 Ray, 4 Horse, 5 Karen, 6 Snowman, 7 Aretha and 8 Janus Pool A is Joe Ray Karen Aretha Pool B is Elvis Horse Snowman Janus Joe vs Ray Anti-King Joe vs Ray Omega Chess Joe vs Karen Anti-King Joe vs Karen Korean Joe vs Aretha Anti-King Joe vs Aretha Time Travel Similarly designed schedule for each player. End of round one: Name wins losses draws points Joe 5 0 1 5.5 Karen 4 2 0 4 Aretha 2 4 0 2 Ray 0 5 1 .5 Joe and Karen go onto winner's pool, Aretha and Ray onto the loser's pool. End of winner's pool: Name wins losses draws points Joe 5 0 1 5.5 Janus 4 2 0 4 Elvis 2 4 0 2 Karen 0 5 1 .5 Joe will choose two of the games, Janus will choose two of the games, and they will play each other once in each game. Overall winner is champion. In the event that they split the four games, they each then choose one more game and play those two...and continue as necessary until there is a winner. Any thoughts?
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.