[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]

[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]

[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩

Game Courier Tournament #2. Sign up for our 2nd multi-variant tournament to be played all on Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Thu, Jun 2, 2005 11:45 AM UTC:

I have not seen my name assigned to any game.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Jun 2, 2005 04:08 PM UTC:

Roberto,

It just worked out that way for the time being. At least you have only
four games left to complete, which is the minimum anyone has left to
complete. If I don't finish the presets for Marseillais Chess and
Switching Chess soon, I will assign those games with dumb presets. Your
game of Kamikaze Mortal Shogi has to wait until your opponent has finished
another game. Your game of Rococo is on hold until George Duke states his
intention to continue with the tournament.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Jun 2, 2005 04:11 PM UTC:

I got another idea for how to handle army selection in CWDA. I could design a preset that randomly selects a different army for each side, making sure that both sides play different armies. This would give no special advantage to either side.

Greg Strong wrote on Thu, Jun 2, 2005 11:15 PM UTC:

Fergus, I like your first idea; give White first choice, and then Black chooses. I would also be OK with the random option, but I definitely like it less. With your first suggestion, I suspect that the first-move advantage and the second-army-choice advantage should pretty much cancel each other out nicely. But I'm easy; I just like CWDA. I'm not even sure there is any reason to make people play different armies. If both players decide to choose the same army, I see no reason to prohibit it. It's been a little while since I have read Betza's pages, but if I remember correctly he said that some tournaments might want rules to prevent the same armies, but he didn't say that was necessary or even recommended. In any event, whatever is fine with me.

Thomas McElmurry wrote on Fri, Jun 3, 2005 04:42 AM UTC:

I have a slight preference for allowing both players to use the same army, but it's fine if we don't.

In addition to the two army-selection methods already proposed (sequential choice and random assignment), there is also the possibility of secret or simultaneous choice. If identical armies are forbidden, there is still the possibility that both players may choose the same army; in this case I like Ralph Betza's suggestion of letting Black choose which player will change armies.

I would be content with any of the three methods, so long as any advantage from the army-selection process goes to Black. In particular, if we choose sequential choice with identical armies permitted, then Black should have the second choice as Greg has proposed. If we choose sequential choice with identical armies forbidden, I think Black should have the option of choosing first (so as to be sure to get his favorite army) or second (so as to have maximum information available when he chooses).

Also, the order of choosing can make a difference even if identical armies are permitted. A player's preference may depend on which army he will be facing. Random example: If Alice is playing the Nutty Knights, then Bob prefers to play the Colorbound Clobberers, but if Alice is playing the Fabulous FIDEs, then Bob prefers the Remarkable Rookies.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Fri, Jun 3, 2005 03:48 PM UTC:

I think the most important thing to avoid is to let both sides in CWDA play the FIDE army, because then the game is just the same as FIDE Chess. With the random method, this can be handled by picking a random number between 1 and 15, which in 4-place binary are 0001 and 1111. The number gets split into two parts, giving an integer value of 0 (00) to 3 (11) for each side, which determines which army each side plays. By using 0 for the FIDE army, and excluding 0000 from random number selection, the remaining possible combinations are chosen with equal probability. I have begun working on a preset that randomly selects the armies, but it could eventually be adapted for individual presets that cover each combination.

Thomas McElmurry wrote on Fri, Jun 3, 2005 10:07 PM UTC:

I'd rather not forbid only the FIDE-FIDE matchup. I'd prefer to allow it, but most important to me is that all the armies be treated symmetrically, i.e. if FIDE-FIDE is forbidden, all four same-army matchups should be forbidden.

CwDA is one of those games that includes FIDE Chess as a subgame, and I don't see a problem with allowing it to do so. It's worth noting that if the players choose their armies, then anyone with a sufficiently strong desire not to play FIDE-FIDE can avoid it by not choosing the FIDE army.

Also, we've already played Fischer Random Chess in this tournament. One FRC game in 960 is identical to FIDE Chess, and we didn't make any provision to prevent that from happening. Granted, the probability is somewhat higher in CwDA, but it's not all that bad. With unrestricted random assignment, there's about a 77% probability that FIDE-FIDE won't occur in the tournament.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sat, Jun 4, 2005 10:37 AM UTC:

I think I would prefer to forbid both players from playing the same army, since I think the main reason for interest in CWDA is the unequal armies aspect. Although the game as a whole may encompass FIDE Chess, Colorbound Clobberers Chess, Nutty Knights Chess, and Remarkable Rookies Chess, none of these pit unequal armies against each other. Although the Fischer Random Chess preset did not prevent FIDE Chess, the chance for it was nearly one tenth of one percent per game, whereas here it would be one out of every sixteen games, which are great enough odds to justify forbidding it.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Tue, Jun 7, 2005 12:35 AM UTC:

I think the CWDA preset is ready. So here's what I'll do. The Black player has the option of first choice, of second choice, or of random selection of armies for both players. In every case, opponents will play different armies. Anyone who gets second choice will get to know what his opponent chose before making his own choice. The Black players for CWDA are Thomas McElmurray, Michael Madsen, Joe Joyce, and Michael Nelson. For the present, it looks like the game between Michael Nelson and Greg Stong is the only game whose players are both ready to start in the near future.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sun, Jun 12, 2005 02:26 PM UTC:

The next game to be assigned will be Gary Gifford vs. Hans Henriksson at Kamikaze Mortal Shogi.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sun, Jun 12, 2005 05:00 PM UTC:

Now that I have finished the Hostage Chess preset, I can assign games for
it. Some time tomorrow I will assign the following games of Hostage
Chess:

Gary Gifford vs. Greg Strong
Joe Joyce vs. Hans Henriksson

The White player has been listed first each time here.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Mon, Jun 13, 2005 03:48 PM UTC:

I have now assigned the Kamikaze Mortal Shogi game and the two Hostage Chess games previously mentioned. I am waiting to hear from Mike Nelson on his CWDA preference. If I don't hear from him in a few days, I will assign the game with a random assignment of armies.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sat, Jul 23, 2005 10:35 PM UTC:

Sorry for neglecting this tournament. I have been getting online mainly at
night, which is when I am already tired. Okay, everyone is down to no more
than two games, and some of us have no games going on right now. So it is
time for more game assignments. I will assign the following games tomorrow
or Monday:

Chess with Different Armies
  Fergus Duniho (1) vs. Michael Madsen (3)
  Greg Strong (2) vs. Michael Nelson (3)

Michael Madsen and Michael Nelson should both contact me concerning
whether they prefer first choice, second choice, or random choice for both
players in CWDA. If you don't contact me by Monday, I will assume random
choice.

Hostage Chess
  Fergus Duniho (2) vs. Antoine Fourriere (2)
  Andreas Kaufmann (3) vs. Michael Nelson (4)

Kamikaze Mortal Shogi
  Roberto Lavieri vs. Thomas McElmurry (3)

Shatranj
  Gary Gifford (1) vs. Thomas McElmurry (4)

Antoine Fourrière wrote on Sun, Jul 24, 2005 07:38 AM UTC:

I won't be available in August (no internet connection), so I am asking for a report of my game of Hostage Chess.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sun, Jul 24, 2005 04:49 PM UTC:

I already got your email, in which you asked for our game to be postponed. So I assume that is what you mean here.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Tue, Jul 26, 2005 02:04 AM UTC:

With the exception of my game with Antoine Fourriere, which he asked to
have postponed, I have just assigned the games I mentioned in my previous
comment. Both CWDA games were assigned with the random and unequal preset,
and each game, it turns out, will pit the FIDE army against a different
army.

Since some more games have ended since, I will plan to assign the CWDA
game of Carlos Carlos vs. Thomas McElmurry on Wednesday. Thomas, who has
Black, has until then to indicate whether he prefers first choice, second
choice, or random choice. If I don't hear from him, the default will be
random choice.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Tue, Jul 26, 2005 02:52 AM UTC:

Now that a rule-enforcing Marseillais Chess preset is available, I will
plan to assign these games on Wednesday:

Carlos Carlos vs. Greg Strong
Michael Madsen vs. Gary Gifford
Roberto Lavieri vs. Andreas Kaufmann

I have listed the White player first each time.

Since Antoine Fourriere will be away for August, his game with Michael
Nelson will be postponed.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Jul 27, 2005 02:56 AM UTC:

I think I'll look into modifying the Marseillais Chess preset for Balanced Marseillais Chess before assigning it. It should just involve some minor changes concerning what to do at the beginning of the game.

🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Thu, Jul 28, 2005 02:08 AM UTC:

I have just made the assignments mentioned in my previous comments.

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Thu, Nov 3, 2005 06:31 PM UTC:

Are we waiting for the end of the game Gifford-Joyce to continue with the last round?

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Thu, Nov 3, 2005 06:33 PM UTC:

Correction: Gifford-McElmurry

Andreas Kaufmann wrote on Thu, Nov 3, 2005 10:19 PM UTC:

Does anybody have a statistics about current standings and how much games are still to be played?

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Thu, Nov 3, 2005 11:43 PM UTC:

I think all players have to play 1 or 2 games more, but I am not sure. I don´t have confident statistics on hand, although it is clear that Gifford is ahead, and it appears he is followed by Fourriere, Kaufmann, Duniho and Lavieri, very probably in this order, and I am not sure about the exact points for each one.

Thomas McElmurry wrote on Fri, Nov 4, 2005 01:14 AM UTC:

[2005-11-14: I've edited this table after the recent and long-dreaded demise of the Black army in Gifford-McElmurry. Just a few minutes later I'm already feeling withdrawal and hoping the last few games will be assigned soon. Has anyone heard from Fergus lately?]

I've been keeping track of the results, and I think the following is correct, although it's possible that I've made mistakes. The last column is the Buchholz-Solkoff tiebreaker, which is guaranteed not to break ties when the tournament is complete.

1	Gary Gifford	+10 =1 -0	10.5/11	+10
2	Antoine Fourrière	+7 =1 -1	7.5/9	+6
3	Andreas Kaufmann	+8 =0 -3	8/11	+5
4	Roberto Lavieri	+5 =4 -1	7/10	+4
5	Fergus Duniho	+6 =0 -3	6/9	+3
6	Carlos Carlos	+6 =1 -4	6.5/11	+2	+1
7	Michael Madsen	+6 =0 -4	6/10	+2	-1
8	Joe Joyce	+2 =2 -5	3/9	-3	+11
9	Thomas McElmurry	+3 =0 -6	3/9	-3	+10
10	Greg Strong	+3 =0 -8	3/11	-5	+12
11	Michael Nelson	+2 =1 -7	2.5/10	-5	+8
12	George Duke	+0 =0 -7	0/7	-7
13	Hans Henriksson	+1 =0 -10	1/11	-9

64 games have been completed, and 14 (listed below) remain.

Alice Chess

McElmurry-Duniho

Chess with Different Armies

Duke-Joyce

Extinction Chess

Madsen-Duke

Hostage Chess

Duke-McElmurry
Duniho-Fourrière

Marseillais Chess

Fourrière-Nelson

Maxima

Joyce-McElmurry

Rococo

Duke-Lavieri

Switching Chess

Carlos-Joyce
Duke-Strong
Fourrière-Madsen
Henriksson-Nelson
Kaufmann-Gifford
Lavieri-Duniho

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Wed, Nov 16, 2005 04:51 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

When are we going to continue with the Tournament?. According to my calculations, Gary Gifford is going to be the winner, independently of the other results, but I suppose all the rest want to play the remaining games. Congratulations, Gary!.

25 comments displayed

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.