Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

asvarga.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#41

Post by BlewisJS »

Maxatar wrote: post #39
cyborgx7 wrote: post #17

If the point of this exercise is to create a game that removes first move advantage, while keeping the game as unchanged as possible, this is an utter failure. Turning a game of perfect information into a bluffing and anticipation game is not a minor change. It's a fundamental change of the essence of what the game is.

I am watching the Speed Chess Championship on Twitch as we speak and the commentators along with interviews with GMs and the players themselves are nonstop talking about bluffing and anticipation. Magnus for example talks about the importance of purposely making a sub-optimal move as a way to bluff your opponent. Your opponent likely has memorized all the optimal moves and so you make a sub-optimal move to leave your…

Sorry to be pedantic but Rozman isn't a GM

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#42

Post by Maxatar »

BlewisJS wrote: post #41
Maxatar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am watching the Speed Chess Championship on Twitch as we speak and the commentators along with interviews with GMs and the players themselves are nonstop talking about bluffing and anticipation. Magnus for example talks about the importance of purposely making a sub-optimal move as a way to bluff your opponent. Your opponent likely has memorized all the optimal moves and so you make a sub-optimal move to leave your…

Sorry to be pedantic but Rozman isn't a GM

Worthwhile correction, thank you. He is an International Master.

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#43

Post by ebiester »

dmurray wrote: post #19

People get hung up on the unfair White advantage in chess, but actually it's not large enough. In tennis, on every point there's a big advantage to the server. Not because he "gets to go first" but because he gets a second chance in some situations. You can prove this: in high level mens tennis the server wins ~70% of points [0] but on a second serve - equivalent to playing without the second chance - he wins almost…

I honestly really want to see a TCEC style rapid chess tournament. The Capablanca variant tournament is somewhat similar, and I really enjoyed that, but the idea where we pick obvious imbalances and see how many can be saved is fascinating to me.

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#44

Post by vsuperpower2021 »

linearrust wrote: post #37
dmurray wrote: post #19

People get hung up on the unfair White advantage in chess, but actually it's not large enough. In tennis, on every point there's a big advantage to the server. Not because he "gets to go first" but because he gets a second chance in some situations. You can prove this: in high level mens tennis the server wins ~70% of points [0] but on a second serve - equivalent to playing without the second chance - he wins almost…

> People get hung up on the unfair White advantage in chess, but actually it's not large enough. It's fairly significant given the 'theoretical' assumption that perfect play always ends in a draw. However, in practice, whites wins significantly more than black. > In tennis, on every point there's a big advantage to the server. Not because he "gets to go first" but because he gets a second chance in some situations. Y…

The statement still applies even if you found one thing that isn't literally the same. The point wasn't "you can do takebacks in chess so this is exactly the same!!!" but that the advantage for moving first in chess is much smaller than is already accepted in other sports.

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#45

Post by linearrust »

vsuperpower2021 wrote: post #44
linearrust wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People get hung up on the unfair White advantage in chess, but actually it's not large enough. It's fairly significant given the 'theoretical' assumption that perfect play always ends in a draw. However, in practice, whites wins significantly more than black. > In tennis, on every point there's a big advantage to the server. Not because he "gets to go first" but because he gets a second chance in some situations. Y…

The statement still applies even if you found one thing that isn't literally the same. The point wasn't "you can do takebacks in chess so this is exactly the same!!!" but that the advantage for moving first in chess is much smaller than is already accepted in other sports.

> The point wasn't "you can do takebacks in chess so this is exactly the same!!!"

That wasn't my point either. My point is that if chess allowed white takebacks ( as in tennis ), the white advantage would skyrocket to 70%+. The analogy was pointless because it wasn't comparing likes with likes.

> but that the advantage for moving first in chess is much smaller than is already accepted in other sports.

Yes. But in most sports, you get equal or close to equal chances to 'move first'. In tennis, you alternate serves with each game. In football, you take turns playing offense. In chess, it's not necessarily like that. Some tournaments you get to play the same opponent with black and with white in equal amounts. But in many tournaments, that's not the case.

So in tennis, you are pretty much guaranteed an equal game since both sides get to serve. But in chess, even though the first move advantage is less, it's still more significant than in tennis many tournaments don't have equal games of white and black.

Re: Fair Chess and Simultaneous Games

#46

Post by gcanyon »

tromp wrote: post #40
gcanyon wrote: post #33

My solution to fair chess: 1. White makes their opening moves - they can move more than one piece, and even the same piece more than once, but: all moves must be legal, and no captures. 2. When White is done, Black has the option to change sides, taking over the white pieces. 3. Regardless of step 2, the player with the black pieces makes the next move. 4. A draw counts as a win for the player with the black pieces.…

That's an interesting approach. But it still allows opening preparation by White. They could setup positions with deeply hidden threats, that Black would at least need to spend a lot of time on to try uncover. So I propose that after White made all their opening moves, Black likewise makes their arbitrary legal moves, and then it's White who has the choice of swapping. That should not only make the game fair, and opt…

> That's an interesting approach

Thanks! I was put off by how much the article's solution changes the nature of the game, saw someone's comment about chess being too even and draws already being a problem, and it hit me in a flash how to largely solve both problems at once.

I agree that White potentially has an advantage because they can play a deceptively strong or weak opening, hoping to fool Black into a bad choice, but I don't see that as too much of a problem, but maybe I'm wrong -- I'm no expert at chess.

Post reply on HN