Originally posted by Very Rusty
padger,

Yes I've seen radioactive69, it has been also suggested by others. Certainly something worth consideration.

I am just saying we don't want to get into individual stats because it is a team concept not an individual one. Completing games when a challenge is lost is not for the team/clan, it is for the individual.

The issues remains which ...[text shortened]... tc.. That is the way it has worked on here for years until the 2016 fiasco, lets call it.

-VR

Thanks VR

(paraphrasing here so your post doesn't get truncated)

There is also the other side of the coin in a team concept what is the sense in holding up a challenge that is lost because one has not completed their game?

It will not change the out come of that particular challenge.

Perhaps making every game count point wise may make some sense after all?

Having said that wouldn't then become more about an individual than Clan?

(end post)

Very good observation, this is one of my concerns as well

Adopting the proposals of mghrn55 or radioactive69 would change the way we create and play clan challenges

There would be a reward for each individual game, that would hopefully encourage the players to see things through to the end

In some challenges, it still might not be worth it
It might be better to take the loss and move on

The hope here is that this will lead to better play, but your point is well taken
Challenges may take longer to play out, and that ties up resources

My clan a challenge in progress with Chessaroos
The last game is now on the 199th move
(no foolin' both players are highly determined)

I don't want to see us fix one thing only to break another

In order to prevent stagnation, we may need to ask Russ to increase the maximum number of challenges

More on 'the never ending game'

http://www.redhotpawn.com/chess/chess-game-history.php?gameid=11873991

My player has a king and a rook, the other a king and a knight

Even if the rook is captured, there is insufficient material, it ends in a draw

But, the knight and king have been out-foxing the rook and king forever

The Chessaroos have already won the challenge, 5 to 2

A win in this game can't change that

...and we're already playing the maximum number of challenges

This is a perfect case in point for shortcircuit's wisdom

Somehow though, neither kingbaz2 nor I want to intercede

Seems we both admire the spirit of this game, even though we should move on

Originally posted by Giannotti
More on 'the never ending game'

http://www.redhotpawn.com/chess/chess-game-history.php?gameid=11873991

My player has a king and a rook, the other a king and a knight

Even if the rook is captured, there is insufficient material, it ends in a draw

But, the knight and king have been out-foxing the rook and king forever

The Chessaroos have alrea ...[text shortened]... want to intercede

Seems we both admire the spirit of this game, even though we should move on

Originally posted by Very Rusty
Giannotti,

This is exactly the type of situation I was talking about. Neither player is playing for the clan now, it becomes a personal matter between the two players. The Challenge has already been decided. You could be playing in another challenge, yet you have to wait until this one is done. It does or may tie you up from being able to set up anothe ...[text shortened]... ve on the go at one time are limited as we all know.

I believe we agree on this point.

-VR

Originally posted by padger
How would you interfere in this game when it is against the rules to tell either player to accept a draw ?
Perhaps there should be a way of discarding the games in this type of situation so that a result could be found
It could then finish 4 - 2

Originally posted by Very Rusty
padger,

I said nothing about interfering in the game. I just said that once the challenge has been won, then the players are no longer playing for the clan, they are playing for their selves and personal pride.

Why do you want to just discard the game as though it has never been played, that makes no logic to me what so ever.

I like the present ...[text shortened]... ing I would have no problem living with. There have been a lot of good ideas put forward.

-VR

Originally posted by padger
I took it from what I have read that once the challenge was won that any remaining games would be forfeited ( resigned ) so that more challenges could be undertaken
How would they know that unless they are told or if they kept an eye on all their clan challenges ( which I do not believe they would do )

good discussion

if i, or kingbaz2, were to follow Metallica's logic for this challenge
we'd both come to the same conclusion, best to move on
and in this instance, nobody would call it early resignation

i admire spirit, and this is a great example
they're playing an intense endgame
it will make both of them better players

this is one of the reasons i'd like to see every game count
we should encourage play like this

i'd also like to see an increase in the maximum number of clan challenges

question is
if three is to few, how many is too many?

Originally posted by Giannotti
n

i admire spirit, and this is a great example
they're playing an intense endgame
it will make both of them better players

this is one of the reasons i'd like to see every game count
we should encourage play like this

i'd also like to see an increase in the maximum number of clan challenges

question is
if three is to few, how many is too many?

to be fair, my player can, and possibly will, win
(okay, so, it's taking a while)

a great lesson for both players
an end game neither will forget

focus on clan play, and this game is futile
focus an chess, and this is exactly what we want to see in every game

please, let's reward each game is our scoring

if we go there, let's allow more than three challenges so as not to kill the system

allow me to ask again
if three is too few, how many is too much

i don't have the answer folks
all we're looking for is a more playable system

When did they change the rule on limits of challenges ?
If it is no more than 3 at a time is 3 * 10 the same as 3* 2 ?
If it is is this fair ?

Originally posted by padger
When did they change the rule on limits of challenges ?
If it is no more than 3 at a time is 3 * 10 the same as 3* 2 ?
If it is is this fair ?

Originally posted by shortcircuit
They changed it late last year. Did you not realize it??

Originally posted by padger
No
Was it announced or did you have to find out by trying to do more than 3 ?