Den 2007-07-10 08:57:01 skrev help bot :

On Jul 10, 1:42 am, "M Winther" wrote:

Just shut up and widen your chess horizons:http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/chessvar.htm


If you would allow me to say just one thing...

Your Web site has about a hundred+ different
variants, and I haven't the time to try even one
quarter that many; of all these which is the
greatest, the foremost, the big cheese?

-- help bot

(I'm told by the younger crowd that WoW
is the game to play, not chess, checkers, or
any other dull board game.)




Thank you for showing interest in my work. To play my variants you
need to buy the download version of Zillions, which is cheap ($20?).

One of my variants, Chess256, can be tried in my freeware DOS
program BlindChess, which also plays blindfold chess.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/blindc.htm

You could also try my Elephant Chess, which is inspired by Asian
variants and can be played with regular pieces and board. Here
the bishop is called "elephant", which is, actually, the original
name.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/elephant.htm

Mats

On Jul 10, 12:00 pm, "Mats Winther" wrote:

Just shut up and widen your chess horizons:http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/chessvar.htm

If you would allow me to say just one thing...

Your Web site has about a hundred+ different
variants, and I haven't the time to try even one
quarter that many; of all these which is the
greatest, the foremost, the big cheese?

-- help bot

(I'm told by the younger crowd that WoW
is the game to play, not chess, checkers, or
any other dull board game.)

Thank you for showing interest in my work. To play my variants you
need to buy the download version of Zillions, which is cheap ($20?).

One of my variants, Chess256, can be tried in my freeware DOS
program BlindChess, which also plays blindfold chess.http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/blindc.htm

You could also try my Elephant Chess, which is inspired by Asian
variants and can be played with regular pieces and board. Here
the bishop is called "elephant", which is, actually, the original
name.http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/elephant.htm


Interesting. So, in order to try your allegedly
improved versions of chess it costs money,
whereas I can play chess for free just about
anywhere. That's a big contra-improvement
there.

One thing about chess which I think could
be improved is the relatively small size of the
playing field. Compared to some board games,
64 squares is rather puny. Truth be told, if I
were not so good at chess I would just give it
up and find something more interesting, some
game which entails a bit of adventure, like say,
an RPG. In chess there is nothing to explore.

-- help bot

Den 2007-07-10 08:35:17 skrev help bot :

On Jul 10, 1:37 am, "M Winther" wrote:

I have never argued that locked pawns, as such, lead to a
drawish game.

"...in orthodox chess a pawn is easy to block. This creates the
marked drawishness of practical endgames." -- M Winther

As we can see, you argued that not only is there
a problem with drawishness, but also that it stems
from... *blocked pawns*.

Perhaps you are already learning that such ideas
are misbegotten, in view of this obvious shifting of
ground (despite bleating denials of the lips even as
the feet are dancing sideways).

Above I discuss the marked drawishness of "practical endgames", not
the game in the initial position. The drawishness of *practical endgames*
derives from the fact that pawns are so easy to block. This is not so in
Chinese Chess, Thai Chess, Burmese Chess, Korean Chess, etc. In
these variants the pawns cannot be blocked. Hence practical endgames
are lively.


Speaking of denial, can you spot the words "practical
endgames" in my earlier quote of Mats Winther? Of
course you can! (So the question is, why does he now
/pretend/ they were omitted and ignored, when they
were not? The answer is denial -- a state in which the
mind ceases to function "normally"!)

In fact, I went into a lengthy discussion of the endgame
of a recent game between GMs Shirov and Adronian, and
I did so only to point out that the blocked pawns were
*not* what led to a draw, but rather, oversimplification.

Here's an idea: instead of blaming the game of chess
for a perceived lack of "liveliness", why not spruce up
your own play and take on the responsibility for *your
own* dullness of play? My most recent game at RedHot
is a perfect example of how an unimaginative approach
to the endgame can lead to disaster. It is far from a
masterpiece, for I mishandled the opening and let my
1600+ opponent get the advantage, but the struggle
which ensued could be very instructive to those who
mistakenly believe the endgame to be dull, barren
soil, lacking in "practical" opportunities.

Once again (with feeling this time), the drawishness
of endgames has a lot to do with things other than
the blockage of pawns. One example would be the
recently-discussed endgame wherein GM Karpov had
KBNN against GM Kasparov's KR; in that game, the
fact that almost ANY RxB sacrifice would leave White
with *insufficient material* was the key to why they
drew. Another biggie is the possibility of stalemate,
or desperado-pieces which cannot be captured on
account of a stalemate.

Blocked pawns -- even in the endgame -- lead to
outpost squares, where pieces can hang out, chat,
get a bite to eat, or just rock out to their i-pods,
knowing they have the full faith and support of a
blocked pawn behind (at an angle) them. These
outpost squares, or even their possibility, can lead
to violent tussling in which both sides try to gain
control -- even in the endgame.

One can only marvel at how so many weak
players are firmly convinced of the endgame's
lack of practical possibilities. The obvious answer
would seem to be for them to study the endgame
a bit and thereby get to a point where the true
possibilities in this dreaded phase are no longer
such a deep, dark mystery.

Really, even offhand I could think of far better
reasons to justify an attempt to "improve" the
game of chess. One such idea is that chess
has become a quagmire of openings theory, in
which even the weakest of players might gain
victory by mere regurgitation of memorized
moves he doesn't even understand! Another
item is the use of computers where the play is
supposed to be on the level, and some freaky
game where a few pieces have unusual moves
would subvert this problem for the most part
(unless your opponent is a skilled computer
programmer). But blaming the blockage of
pawns for some games ending in draws seems
downright silly to me. Moreover, the fact that
there are not only two, but three possible
outcomes makes things even more interesting.

-- help bot



I don't play dull chess. Check out my games in any ChessBase
game collection. Moreover, I'm not out to replace orthochess. I
have made some creative products, exactly like people create
chess problems. Chess problems have no strong relation to
orthochess either.

Mats

On Jul 11, 1:47 am, "Mats Winther" wrote:

I don't play dull chess. Check out my games in any ChessBase
game collection.

Really? You have made several comments here which
seem to strongly imply that you are having trouble with
blocked pawns, draws, and a general dullness of play.


Moreover, I'm not out to replace orthochess. I
have made some creative products, exactly like people create
chess problems. Chess problems have no strong relation to
orthochess either.


That is their downfall; to the extent that chess problems
are ridiculously impossible to occur in any real chess
game, they will always suffer from a lack of interest from
practical players.

The poster "Someon" keeps giving links here to the
games of famous grandmasters, and sometimes I click
one and replay the game just to see if there is any
particular reason that game was selected. In one of
these more recent games, between GMs Anand and
Piket, I spotted a move which the winner -- a world-
championship contender, appeared to have simply
missed. Sure enough, when I punched this into my
chess program, it agreed that GM Anand had simply
overlooked a bone-crusher tactic which I found quite
easily! That was a rather messy position, and my real
forte is not spotting these problem-like tactical shots,
because I much prefer positional play; but because I
have been jousting with Fritz 5.32 -- dumbed down to
play closer to my own level -- I am now learning to
"see" that not all absurdities are unplayable in
practice.

It is strange but even as chess, and any simple
variation of it's basic idea, continues onward as-is,
there are armies of well-paid programmers on the
march, creating games which untold millions will
want to play "live" via the internet. The market for
these games, such as WoW, for instance, is so
big that some companies hire it done by others
who invest millions of dollars in the development
of just a single such game. IMO, boardgames
like chess are doomed to end up looking "quaint"
by comparison; dull, even.

-- help bot

" It is strange but even as chess, and any simple
variation of it's basic idea, continues onward as-is,
there are armies of well-paid programmers on the
march, creating games which untold millions will
want to play "live" via the internet. The market for
these games, such as WoW, for instance, is so
big that some companies hire it done by others
who invest millions of dollars in the development
of just a single such game. IMO, boardgames
like chess are doomed to end up looking "quaint"
by comparison; dull, even.

-- help bot

The problem with these MMORPG's (massive multiplayer
online role playing games) is that they end up being a
'grindfest' where you target a 'mob' and press your attack
key... then go make a sandwich... There is very little
to these games. Many have been failures as well,
'Asherons Call 2' has shut down and the huge
disappointment 'Vanguard' is a disasterous game.
These games tend to get people jumping from one 'hit'
game to the next.

Ive played alot of these 'games'. Everquest, Neocron,
Planetside, City of heroes, Everquest 2... All of them charge
an (on average) $15 a month to what is really a pretty
chatline with very little gameplay. I now only
play a 'free' mmorpg once in awhile with my kids.
(called FlyFF).

I still go back to playing chess. It has real strategy compared
to alot of these games which are nothing but pretty eyecandy.
Atleast with chess I don't need the latest bleeding edge system
to play a game online...

J.Lohner

On Jul 12, 10:50 pm, "Inconnux" wrote:

The problem with these MMORPG's (massive multiplayer
online role playing games) is that they end up being a
'grindfest' where you target a 'mob' and press your attack
key... then go make a sandwich...


In the old days, there were a multitude of games
in which you played just against the computer, and
indeed, the designers had way over-done the parts
where you built up points (i.e. "experience") by
killing orcs, stealing treasures, or whatever, via the
dull repetition of some simple but time-consuming
process as described above. But there was no
sandwich making, for leave your computer for a
minute and your character would quickly be killed
by a hundred dim-witted orcs!


There is very little to these games.


Really? About a year or so ago, I went out to eat
with my extended family, and the younger folks were
ranting about this game like it was the greatest thing
since sliced bread. Just this Sunday, I went again,
and still, even after all this time and the release of
other, similar games, WoW is all the rage. The
youngest member seems to like the Sims, and
would undoubtedly buy every version, but for the
cost; never mind how dated that game may now be.



Many have been failures as well,
'Asherons Call 2' has shut down and the huge
disappointment 'Vanguard' is a disasterous game.
These games tend to get people jumping from one 'hit'
game to the next.


Okay, but what about the successful games like
WoW, for instance?


Ive played alot of these 'games'. Everquest, Neocron,
Planetside, City of heroes, Everquest 2... All of them charge
an (on average) $15 a month to what is really a pretty
chatline with very little gameplay. I now only
play a 'free' mmorpg once in awhile with my kids.
(called FlyFF).


To a game addict, $15 per month may not seem
very much; divide by the number of hours wasted
-- I mean played of course! -- and it dwindles down
to a mere trickle of pocket change.


I still go back to playing chess. It has real strategy compared
to alot of these games which are nothing but pretty eyecandy.


Okay, but several of the games you listed earlier
were not the creme de la creme of the genre, so
this is a bit like comparing apples to oranges. In
truth, there are board games with more "strategy"
and less "tactics" than chess, but chess is still
the king in terms of prestige.


At least with chess I don't need the latest bleeding edge system
to play a game online...


In my jousting with Fritz 5.32 (very dated now),
the computer moves almost instantly, leaving my
clock to run throughout the entire game. I feel
like I'm almost playing bullet chess.

-- help bot

Really? About a year or so ago, I went out to eat
with my extended family, and the younger folks were
ranting about this game like it was the greatest thing
since sliced bread. Just this Sunday, I went again,
and still, even after all this time and the release of
other, similar games, WoW is all the rage. The
youngest member seems to like the Sims, and
would undoubtedly buy every version, but for the
cost; never mind how dated that game may now be.

WoW is a dumbed down mmorpg that appeals mainly to
kids who's voices havent changed In many of the
other mmorpg's that I've played, WoW has a bad rep
as being a 'lite' game. The southpark episode gave
it free advertising to this market

Okay, but what about the successful games like
WoW, for instance?

WoW has lost quite a few members since it first started.
They are now starting to advertise 'free trial' versions
of the game... a sure fire sign of a dying game.


To a game addict, $15 per month may not seem
very much; divide by the number of hours wasted
-- I mean played of course! -- and it dwindles down
to a mere trickle of pocket change.


Adds up when the wife and both kids play as well.

Okay, but several of the games you listed earlier
were not the creme de la creme of the genre, so

Everquest was the largest game for years, and City
of heroes was quite successful. Problem with these
games is when the next 'big' game comes out, most of
your new online friends leave to try it and your 'world'
becomes a ghost town. It hasn't happened to 'WoW'
yet, but given time it will.

this is a bit like comparing apples to oranges. In
truth, there are board games with more "strategy"
and less "tactics" than chess, but chess is still
the king in terms of prestige.

chess is more popular than these strategy board games
because of its 'simplicity', yet complex nature of the game.
Another key feature is there is no luck factor.

On Jul 13, 1:54 am, "Inconnux" wrote:

Really? About a year or so ago, I went out to eat
with my extended family, and the younger folks were
ranting about this game like it was the greatest thing
since sliced bread. Just this Sunday, I went again,
and still, even after all this time and the release of
other, similar games, WoW is all the rage. The
youngest member seems to like the Sims, and
would undoubtedly buy every version, but for the
cost; never mind how dated that game may now be.

WoW is a dumbed down mmorpg that appeals mainly to
kids who's voices havent changed

Well, my niece is crazy about it, and she is over twenty.
She seems to have met a "boy" in the game who came
out to eat with us, and he was around thirty-something.


In many of the other mmorpg's that I've played, WoW has a bad rep
as being a 'lite' game.

I know what you mean. Among movie makers and
TV script writers, chess is a game for old men -- and,
occasionally, intellectuals. But what is the reality?


The southpark episode gave
it free advertising to this market

One reason I am focused on this particular game
is that it is owned by a company whose stock I
own. An investment guru named Robert Hsu
believes it is on track to continue its present
course of growth and profits, and it is already up
a bunch since he first recommended it. They
have locked up the exclusive rights to Field of
Honor -- a 3-D multiplayer online game. Zacks
(an online investment company somewhat akin
to Standard and Poors) rates it a "sell", giving
NCTY its lowest ranking (5); but this appears to
be the automatic result of the stock having
already far exceeded its precalculated "target
price"; in other words, they were clueless and
the reason for the low ranking is simple math.


Okay, but what about the successful games like
WoW, for instance?

WoW has lost quite a few members since it first started.
They are now starting to advertise 'free trial' versions
of the game... a sure fire sign of a dying game.


Hey -- I got a free trial version of Rybka: does this
mean the program is already doomed to be super-
seded by "Wally-chess", "Fred's Free Chess" and
"Chessmaster 1.0"? ;D

There are free trial versions of Chessbase, The
Chess Assistant, Fritz, Rebel, and every type of
security software imaginable; it's a standard
marketing scheme, like getting a "free" fourth
automobile tire when you buy three. (Don't fall
for it; just buy two and put them on opposite
corners so when one of the old ones blows, the
car won't drag the ground as much.)


To a game addict, $15 per month may not seem
very much; divide by the number of hours wasted
-- I mean played of course! -- and it dwindles down
to a mere trickle of pocket change.

Adds up when the wife and both kids play as well.


How do you think Phil Innes got to be nearly an IM?
That's right: he let the wife and kids play using his
account, and his rating nearly doubled! ;D


Okay, but several of the games you listed earlier
were not the creme de la creme of the genre, so

Everquest was the largest game for years, and City
of heroes was quite successful. Problem with these
games is when the next 'big' game comes out, most of
your new online friends leave to try it and your 'world'
becomes a ghost town. It hasn't happened to 'WoW'
yet, but given time it will.


Ah, so the cost is not really that much of a problem
if players can jump ship at will and try new games
which come along, then. This WoW game, and a
few others like it, are played heavily in China, by
young people who are not exactly wealthy. The
cost per hour is relatively small. Much like text
messaging, even a small fee, if multiplied by many
millions of units, adds up.


this is a bit like comparing apples to oranges. In
truth, there are board games with more "strategy"
and less "tactics" than chess, but chess is still
the king in terms of prestige.

chess is more popular than these strategy board games
because of its 'simplicity', yet complex nature of the game.
Another key feature is there is no luck factor.


The no-luck factor is where chess comes out on
top against games in which the roll of the dice is
a big issue. But some chess players like this sort
of thing, and you will sometimes find them playing
backgammon, for instance, at a chess tourney.

One reason these massively multi-player games
do well is that kids have a lot of time on their hands
to play. Me, I spent a good deal of time weeding
and then watering my lawn today. Now it's 3 am
and of course, it rains... .

-- help bot

One reason I am focused on this particular game
is that it is owned by a company whose stock I
own. An investment guru named Robert Hsu
believes it is on track to continue its present
course of growth and profits, and it is already up
a bunch since he first recommended it. They
have locked up the exclusive rights to Field of
Honor -- a 3-D multiplayer online game. Zacks
(an online investment company somewhat akin
to Standard and Poors) rates it a "sell", giving
NCTY its lowest ranking (5); but this appears to
be the automatic result of the stock having
already far exceeded its precalculated "target
price"; in other words, they were clueless and
the reason for the low ranking is simple math.

I wouldn't buy stock in any video game company.
A couple of bad games and they are history. Yesterdays
star companies are bankrupt today.


WoW has lost quite a few members since it first started.
They are now starting to advertise 'free trial' versions
of the game... a sure fire sign of a dying game.


Hey -- I got a free trial version of Rybka: does this
mean the program is already doomed to be super-
seded by "Wally-chess", "Fred's Free Chess" and
"Chessmaster 1.0"? ;D

When mmorpg's start giving free trials away it is because
they are losing subscriptions. No successful mmorpg has
given away 'free trials' when they are first released.

Ah, so the cost is not really that much of a problem
if players can jump ship at will and try new games
which come along, then. This WoW game, and a
few others like it, are played heavily in China, by
young people who are not exactly wealthy. The
cost per hour is relatively small. Much like text
messaging, even a small fee, if multiplied by many
millions of units, adds up.

those players are called 'farmers' they grab items in game
that everyone want and sell them for real life cash... its
a lucrative job for people in china and the bane of
mmorpg creators. Often they build characters up to the
maximum level and then sell the accounts.


of thing, and you will sometimes find them playing
backgammon, for instance, at a chess tourney.


Ive yet to see any othergame played at chess tournaments.

One reason these massively multi-player games
do well is that kids have a lot of time on their hands
to play. Me, I spent a good deal of time weeding
and then watering my lawn today. Now it's 3 am
and of course, it rains... .

lol after I moved out of my parents house I swore I would
never pick another weed So I don't waste any time on that ...

On Jul 15, 12:50 am, "Inconnux" wrote:

I wouldn't buy stock in any video game company.
A couple of bad games and they are history. Yesterdays
star companies are bankrupt today.


As far as I know, this might well apply to Atari, but others
like Activision and Electronic Arts are still buzzing along.
Because of the internet and its ever-increasing speed and
power, the online games are going to make a lot of money.
The one I talked about earlier largely targets Chinese youth,
and this is a rapidly growing audience.


those players are called 'farmers' they grab items in game
that everyone want and sell them for real life cash... its
a lucrative job for people in china and the bane of
mmorpg creators. Often they build characters up to the
maximum level and then sell the accounts.


Wow. What a way to make a living!


of thing, and you will sometimes find them playing
backgammon, for instance, at a chess tourney.

Ive yet to see any othergame played at chess tournaments.


Some people were a bit insulted by it.


One reason these massively multi-player games
do well is that kids have a lot of time on their hands
to play. Me, I spent a good deal of time weeding
and then watering my lawn today. Now it's 3 am
and of course, it rains... .

lol after I moved out of my parents house I swore I would
never pick another weed So I don't waste any time on that ...


So, you let THEM win. They always prevail in the end;
the weeds and insects and bacteria. But I won't go down
without a fight. Kicking and screaming... not with a
whimper, but with a bang... . :D

-- help bot