27 Feb 07
Originally posted by c99uxAs pointed out, in the current system, nothing stops your opponent from replying virtually instantly to your move. However, since the minimum time control here is 1 move per day, I don't see why you wouldn't just wait until the next day to make a move.
Russ,
If this is implemented, would the moves be automatic and instant? I mean, if my opponent has moved and done a "What if..." thingy, then when I move, would my opponent's "if..." move be made and my timeout start reducing again, straight away?
In which case, I'd be against it, because then I'd have to make another move quickly (within the T/O), but m ...[text shortened]... nt wouldn't have to do anything. I think it would give some players an unfair advantage.
27 Feb 07
If I can foresee my opponents move with a 100% accuracy, I can't imagine why the delay is neccesary (more than 5 minutes to disguise the conditional move). It just speeds the game up a little.
But I see the psycological implications. "Who is really playing with me? It feels like a computer engine.) But with a delay of 5 minutes no one can tell a original move from an if-then move.
I look forward to Russ' implementation of conditional moves.
27 Feb 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhen you make your own move, I would imagine you would be notified immediately that a "conditional move" had been entered by your opponent and was there for you to reply to.
If I can foresee my opponents move with a 100% accuracy, I can't imagine why the delay is neccesary (more than 5 minutes to disguise the conditional move). It just speeds the game up a little.
But I see the psycological implications. "Who is really playing with me? It feels like a computer engine.) But with a delay of 5 minutes no one can tell a original move from an if-then move.
I look forward to Russ' implementation of conditional moves.
27 Feb 07
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveDoesn't have to be. There is no reason to it. And it doesn't matter if you know it was an auto-move or not. In any case there is a will of the opponent who actually decided what to do after a particular move. I do it all the time - "If he does 'this' I do 'that'." It's called look ahead. Why not give it in a If-Then instruction?
When you make your own move, I would imagine you would be notified immediately that a "conditional move" had been entered by your opponent and was there for you to reply to.
I look forward to see how Russ et al implement the conditional moves feature.
27 Feb 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasWell, I think it would be wise to inform you that your opponent has replied immediately - whether it says it's a pre-selected conditional move or a manual move is irrelevant as they both come from your opponent.
Doesn't have to be. There is no reason to it. And it doesn't matter if you know it was an auto-move or not. In any case there is a will of the opponent who actually decided what to do after a particular move. I do it all the time - "If he does 'this' I do 'that'." It's called look ahead. Why not give it in a If-Then instruction?
I look forward to see how Russ et al implement the conditional moves feature.
Just that if you are not told straight away you may assume you have longer to reply than you have.
28 Feb 07
Call me old-fashioned, but conditional moves aren't part of chess. But if you like them, they're already possible with messaging. If implemented, they should be part of an individual player's settings. If I want conditional moves and you don't, I shouldn't be able to challenge you.
Carl
28 Feb 07
Originally posted by czitI do it all the time in OTH games. I calculate a number of moves ahead and If my opponent goes as my plan Then I move immediately without recalculate. Speeds the game up a little. Handy when you're short in time.
Call me old-fashioned, but conditional moves aren't part of chess. But if you like them, they're already possible with messaging. If implemented, they should be part of an individual player's settings. If I want conditional moves and you don't, I shouldn't be able to challenge you.
Carl
I see the pro about the If-Then feature: It speeds games up when there are obvious moves. It is particularly useful for non subscribing members who has only sex games to play. Games flow faster.
I don't see any cons. Possibly psycological ones. You feel that you lose control over the game. It doesn't feel right when your move already has been dealt with , like you opponent has open your skull and see right into your chess centre, that feels like cheating. Som the psycological factor is not a small one.
If people find this If-Then feature so annoying, I don't mind an option in your games profile that says "I don't want any auto moves against me". I would gladly have opponents using the If-Then agains me, because the I don't have to wait for him to move if he already knows what he's going to move.
28 Feb 07
I will use if moves only when the reply is forced or really obvious. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve received a series of if moves (sometimes 3-4 moves long) that had serious mistakes that my opponents probably would have seen if they’d been playing one move at a time. I’ve told this story before, but it bears repeating. I was once dead lost against a much lower rated opponent, so I sent him a series of 3 if moves that avoided the game winning line. He accepted them and I went on to win. The moral is use caution when it comes to if moves!
28 Feb 07
Originally posted by masscatIf I got it right, the opponent will not know my If-Then conditionals. When he answers in a particular way that fit my If-Then, then the system move my preferred move automatically. He will not even know (*) who moved the piece, me or the system, other than the system moves immediately.
I will use if moves only when the reply is forced or really obvious. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve received a series of if moves (sometimes 3-4 moves long) that had serious mistakes that my opponents probably would have seen if they’d been playing one move at a time. I’ve told this story before, but it bears repeating. I was once dead lost against a ...[text shortened]... line. He accepted them and I went on to win. The moral is use caution when it comes to if moves!
(*) One proposal is that the opponent will know, due to information given from the system, but he will never know what moves are in my If-Then conditionals before he actually make a move.
I'm so curious how Russ will implement this If-Then feature. I know how I would do, but I put my trust to Russ formidable ability to get it right, and often suprisingly better than what I have thought it to be.
28 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasI have seen that it works as you describe with no problems on certain other chess sites.
If I got it right, the opponent will not know my If-Then conditionals. When he answers in a particular way that fit my If-Then, then the system move my preferred move automatically. He will not even know (*) who moved the piece, me or the system, other than the system moves immediately.
(*) One proposal is that the opponent will know, due to informatio ...[text shortened]... t he will never know what moves are in my If-Then conditionals before he actually make a move.
You couldn't be permitted to see the opponents move until you make your own. 🙄
28 Feb 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasIt would be kind of nice to know ahead of time if my opponent had entered conditional moves, that way I can plan on sticking around to play out whatever line the opponent thought was forced. On the other hand, if I saw that flag up (indicating conditional moves had been entered) it would probably cause me to spend more time looking at the position before making the first move, trying to figure out what my opponent had seen. So I'd say it's probably best not to give out an indication that conditional moves have been entered.
(*) One proposal is that the opponent will know, due to information given from the system, but he will never know what moves are in my If-Then conditionals before he actually make a move.
28 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by leisurelyslothUntil you make your move - then you could be informed with no problem. And I wouldn't foresee it informing you how many moves had been conditionally entered [eg- there may be only the one]
....So I'd say it's probably best not to give out an indication that conditional moves have been entered.
28 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveAt the time correspondence chess was meant to be sending postcards with moves back and forth there was an option with If-Then moves. "I move e2-e4 and if you answer e7-e5 then I move f2-f4.” He opponent has the option to answer e4 with e5 and the following f4 with exf4 or something else. He had also the option to answer d4 with d5 alone, just to think it over. Or he can answer the e4 with any other move.
You couldn't be permitted to see the opponents move until you make your own. 🙄
This was what I thought masscat meant when he wrote: "I was once dead lost against a much lower rated opponent, so I sent him a series of 3 if moves that avoided the game winning line. He accepted them and I went on to win."
This is not the purpose here, if I understand the discussion correctly.
Here I think I give the system, and system alone, the information that says "If he answers my e2-e4 with e7-e5 then I want the system to move f2-f4 automatically". My opponent would not know what my answer will be until he actually moved the pawn from e7 to e5.
I would certainly not my opponent to know that I'm aiming at Kings Gambit, because then , if he don't feel comfortable with this line of opening, he'll avoid it completely.
Russ - can you describe how the If-Then feature will work? Only that we will discuss the same thing.
28 Feb 07
Originally posted by czitI can't call you old-fashioned, because conditional moves have historically been a part of correspondence chess.
Call me old-fashioned, but conditional moves aren't part of chess. But if you like them, they're already possible with messaging. If implemented, they should be part of an individual player's settings. If I want conditional moves and you don't, I shouldn't be able to challenge you.
Carl
It is not a question of implementing a new feature. It's a question of catching up to the existing standard.
01 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by leisurelyslothYes, a flag would be a good idea.
It would be kind of nice to know ahead of time if my opponent had entered conditional moves, that way I can plan on sticking around to play out whatever line the opponent thought was forced. On the other hand, if I saw that flag up (indicating conditional moves had been entered) it would probably cause me to spend more time looking at the position be say it's probably best not to give out an indication that conditional moves have been entered.
The main reason I would be against conditional moves is because it gives my opponent a time advantage if there is even a short delay between my pre-conditional move and his post-conditional automatic move.
For example, if my opponent knows I only play 7/14 games, and move once a week per game, on a Saturday evening, he will know when he makes a conditional move on a Monday that he has 12 days before having to make his next move.
If I make a pre-conditional move, then my timebank almost immediately starts ticking away against me again.
Of course, all this supposes that I move as my opponent suspects I will...