Eliminated games

Originally posted by @roma45
Look at site announcements
Thread " clan challenge results change"

All wins 5 moves or less are now void.

Seems to me that the whole idea of a fair clan challenge system is unlikely as it stands and maybe the whole thing should be reconsidered
Until then lets have the Clans in alphabetic order which is the only fair option and impose a no name change until it has been sorted

Originally posted by @padger
Seems to me that the whole idea of a fair clan challenge system is unlikely as it stands and maybe the whole thing should be reconsidered
Until then lets have the Clans in alphabetic order which is the only fair option and impose a no name change until it has been sorted

You are more than welcome to sort the clans alphabetically if you wish.
Just set the sort yourself when you bring up the clan list.

The default sort will continue to be net points, however.

Originally posted by @shortcircuit
I can understand the move limitations on time outs, but I do not understand why a legitimate checkmate has been tossed out. This should be allowed and the challenge should be split 6-6.

There is no way this should be scored this way. I believe this is just a glitch in the system Russ installed.

I believe Russ announced that games under 6 moves would no longer count, regardless whether by timeout or resignation. Checkmates in under 6 moves were not mentioned. I never thought that an arbitrary limit on the number of moves would solve the problems which were discussed at length previously, and this is a case in point. Games which end in Scholar's Mate or Fool's Mate should count.

Maybe it should be changed to 3 moves (as this is the limit for challenges when the trash can appears)?

Originally posted by @moonbus
I believe Russ announced that games under 6 moves would no longer count, regardless whether by timeout or resignation. Checkmates in under 6 moves were not mentioned. I never thought that an arbitrary limit on the number of moves would solve the problems which were discussed at length previously, and this is a case in point. Games which end in Scholar's Mate or Fool's Mate should count.

The number of moves limit was a vast improvement
Stopped a certain clan using dead players to feed another clan plus those who " got busy" and timed out again all against the one clan.
Consequences of the cheating easy riders

Originally posted by @silverstriker
Maybe it should be changed to 3 moves (as this is the limit for challenges when the trash can appears)?

Silverstriker,

I do believe a foolsmate is done in 3 moves, so that would be a legal mate.

We all know why the rule in the amount of moves was implemented to start with.

It sure did clear up that problem!! 😉

-VR

Originally posted by @very-rusty
Silverstriker,

I do believe a foolsmate is done in 3 moves, so that would be a legal mate.

We all know why the rule in the amount of moves was implemented to start with.

It sure did clear up that problem!! 😉

-VR

i think fools mate would be covered in the 4th move? (but looking at my chess rating i could easily be wrong)

Im finding the thumbs down very amusing! Who have i upset i wonder?

Originally posted by @silverstriker
i think fools mate would be covered in the 4th move? (but looking at my chess rating i could easily be wrong)

Im finding the thumbs down very amusing! Who have i upset i wonder?

Silver,

Actually it can happen in as few as 2 moves!!!

http://www.chesscorner.com/tutorial/basic/scholars/scholars.htm

LOL....Oops I hit the wrong thumb!

Don't know who the other one is from...first Initial could begin with an r or v or g or b.... 😉

-VR

Originally posted by @roma45
The number of moves limit was a vast improvement
Stopped a certain clan using dead players to feed another clan plus those who " got busy" and timed out again all against the one clan.
Consequences of the cheating easy riders

There were better ways of dealing with that issue than setting an arbitrary automatic limit on the number of moves, which would not have had the unintended effect we see in the game in question which triggered this thread.

A similar case may soon arise in the currently running challenge between Metallica and the Misfits, where a player timed out on move 6. If that game too is not counted, I expect the Misfit captain will be entitled to lodge a protest.

The shortest legal mate.

Originally posted by @moonbus
[pgn]1. f4 e6 2. g4 Qh4#
[/pgn]


The shortest legal mate.

moonbus,

Yes, that is the one.

Thanks,

-VR

And it should definitely count!

Originally posted by @silverstriker
Maybe it should be changed to 3 moves (as this is the limit for challenges when the trash can appears)?

As the above PGN demonstrates, even a three-move automatic dis-count would catch dolphins in the tunafish net. Not a good solution to the problem.

Originally posted by @moonbus
There were better ways of dealing with that issue than setting an arbitrary automatic limit on the number of moves, which would not have had the unintended effect we see in the game in question which triggered this thread.

A similar case may soon arise in the currently running challenge between Metallica and the Misfits, where a player timed out on move ...[text shortened]... f that game too is not counted, I expect the Misfit captain will be entitled to lodge a protest.

If it's timed out on move six it will count.
Only games under five are eliminated checkmates should count .but they don't
Not sure how hard it would be for Russ to re write the code
Still sure draws have to be eight moves or they don't count as well which is goodv

Originally posted by @roma45
If it's timed out on move six it will count.
Only games under five are eliminated checkmates should count .but they don't
Not sure how hard it would be for Russ to re write the code
Still sure draws have to be eight moves or they don't count as well which is goodv

I'm not sure Russ even knows that this is an issue. Has anyone brought it to his attention, that a 4-move checkmate has been dis-counted? The score on that challenge currently stands at 11 points to the 'winner'; it should have split 6:6, as shortcircuit said.