![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: book, odds, open, worth |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
A common misconception weak players have is that they are weak and the
strong players are strong only because the strong players have memorized more opening book lines. In the game of Scrabble, it is common for strong players to offer weak players "Dictionary Odds". Players who are not good at scrabble are allowed to look up words in the dictionary, which the strong player cannot do. It turns out that dictionary odds are worth very little in scrabble. I have never seen this done but in chess I am prepared to offer opening book odds. I will alow my opponent to bring any chess opening book to the board, and he will be allowed to look up any opening in the book and play any more he finds there. Since I play off-beat openings not found in any book, I will give the added stipulation that I will only play standard normal openings found in MCO and other standard works. The question is: How much is this worth? I believe that this will be worth about 100 rating points, not more. In other words, a 1700 player will play equal to an 1800 player with these odds. Sorry, but you 1700 players out there will not play like a grandmaster even with these odds. Sam Sloan |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
There are 2 somewhat different subcases to consider. In one case, A
plays B, and both know B will use a book. In a second case, A plays B, and A doesn't know that B is using a book (a basic form of computer cheating). I play lines which are known to be busted quite frequently, figuring opponents will not know the long,dangerous looking, obscure lines. However, if I run into these lines unexpectedly, I am really quite far down in the game. I would never go into these lines if I knew my opponent had a book. My guess is that having a book in the first situation is worth less than 100 points, while in the second case it varies very much by how sound player A's opening lines are. On average at amateur levels, the second case is worth more than 100 points (my guess only of course). Interesting ethical question on how to test the 2 cases. The easiest way is to play on the computer with book, alternately telling opponents/not telling that you are using a book. Doesn't seem to ethical, however. Of course, according to Mr Bibuld, Sam is a "moral bacillus", so maybe it won't tarnish his soul much to try this out! Jerry Spinrad (Sam Sloan) wrote in message ... A common misconception weak players have is that they are weak and the strong players are strong only because the strong players have memorized more opening book lines. In the game of Scrabble, it is common for strong players to offer weak players "Dictionary Odds". Players who are not good at scrabble are allowed to look up words in the dictionary, which the strong player cannot do. It turns out that dictionary odds are worth very little in scrabble. I have never seen this done but in chess I am prepared to offer opening book odds. I will alow my opponent to bring any chess opening book to the board, and he will be allowed to look up any opening in the book and play any more he finds there. Since I play off-beat openings not found in any book, I will give the added stipulation that I will only play standard normal openings found in MCO and other standard works. The question is: How much is this worth? I believe that this will be worth about 100 rating points, not more. In other words, a 1700 player will play equal to an 1800 player with these odds. Sorry, but you 1700 players out there will not play like a grandmaster even with these odds. Sam Sloan |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sam, You're a ****ty player, about my strength. You couldn't offer a C player "dictionary" odds and neither could I, even though I now own not one but THREE pair of "chess glasses." You'd be losing at move 12 90% of the time. Very bad odds. Go find Win Moe, dude. Convert him to Islam. adp "Sam Sloan" wrote in message ... A common misconception weak players have is that they are weak and the strong players are strong only because the strong players have memorized more opening book lines. In the game of Scrabble, it is common for strong players to offer weak players "Dictionary Odds". Players who are not good at scrabble are allowed to look up words in the dictionary, which the strong player cannot do. It turns out that dictionary odds are worth very little in scrabble. I have never seen this done but in chess I am prepared to offer opening book odds. I will alow my opponent to bring any chess opening book to the board, and he will be allowed to look up any opening in the book and play any more he finds there. Since I play off-beat openings not found in any book, I will give the added stipulation that I will only play standard normal openings found in MCO and other standard works. The question is: How much is this worth? I believe that this will be worth about 100 rating points, not more. In other words, a 1700 player will play equal to an 1800 player with these odds. Sorry, but you 1700 players out there will not play like a grandmaster even with these odds. Sam Sloan |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| How much are "Open Book Odds" worth? | Sam Sloan | rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) | 4 | July 6th 04 07:46 AM |
| How much are "Open Book Odds" worth? | Sam Sloan | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 4 | July 6th 04 07:46 AM |
| Newbie looking for texts | Lawrence Szenes-Strauss | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 5 | April 26th 04 10:06 PM |
| Thoughts on 'Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess'? | Vic Martinez | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 33 | October 29th 03 12:49 PM |
| Good books? | 47 Ronin | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 9 | July 22nd 03 08:18 PM |