Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 02 Aug '08 18:28
    Hi Chaps,

    Given this some thought so listen up.

    From now on eveytime you send a move it will go though the process.

    The Process

    After 5 moves have been played by either side.

    Rybka will analyse position for 5 minutes store top 3 replies
    and then send move onto opposing player.

    When the reply is sent if it is one of the chosen moves by Rybka,
    then system will advise both players that a 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice
    has been made.
    The sending player is not given the option to change his move.

    So along with each game you will see a % score for each player
    which will go up or down as the game continues.

    Yes of course there will be only moves and alike and if you are
    NOT using a box then imagine your joy when you discover you have
    made a good move cleanly.

    But Also...

    Imagine the fear and feeling of guilt a box user will have.?

    He will have to stop there and then as he sees move after move
    in a critical double edged position being classes as the top move.
    again and again and again...and his opponent can see the same!

    The box will get switched off.

    (This idea may get surpessed because sales of Fritz and Rybka may go down).
  2. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    02 Aug '08 18:48 / 1 edit
    This cumbersome and expensive enhancement to RHP likely will encourage cheating as players fire up Rybka to find which moves they need to avoid.
  3. 02 Aug '08 18:54
    Just looking at the Public Games page right now, about 50-100 moves are being submitted *per minute*. So you're going to need quite a server farm to analyze each move for 5 minutes.
  4. 02 Aug '08 18:56 / 1 edit
    You want to analyze for 5 minuites every move made on the site? Do you have a few 1000 spare servers lying around?


    Edit = Beaten
  5. 02 Aug '08 18:58
    That's two for the idea - anybody else?

    It's not expensive one Rybka will do.

    Rate of play will slow down as process kicks in,
    which is good thing - you guys move too fast - give single piece
    blunder check before you 'send.'
  6. 02 Aug '08 19:09
    Haha, yeah, that will slow down the rate of play a bit.

    Say 50 moves are currently submitted per minute. You start analyzing the first move, which takes 5 minutes. By the end of the 5 minutes, 250 moves are waiting which will take another 1250 minutes to process, or almost a full day.

    I wonder how many subscribers will be left when you replace their games with a screen that says, "You may submit your next move in 2-3 months..."
  7. 02 Aug '08 20:30 / 1 edit
    Mods should be able to enable this process for suspicious players (without their knowledge) but this is just not practical for RHP as a whole.
  8. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    02 Aug '08 21:12
    Originally posted by exigentsky
    Mods should be able to enable this process for suspicious players (without their knowledge) but this is just not practical for RHP as a whole.
    thesis + antithesis = synthesis

    Now we're getting somewhere!
  9. 02 Aug '08 21:44 / 1 edit
    A variation of the proposed idea to limit the analysis for games of the Top 100 players. In this case, what hardware resources would be needed?

    Another idea is to run periodic offline batches of a limited number of games randomly selected from a pool of games covering a specified period of time. Watch lists can be then be created and updated based on these runs. Game mods would have access to these lists to select cases that deserve detailed investigation.
  10. 02 Aug '08 22:08
    There are several issues I see with this.

    One is the fact that at the top I am quite sure the opening theory extends past 5 moves on each side in most games.

    Second is that if one person plays very badly such as hanging pieces, walking into obvious tactical traps, or has to deal with a very long forced variation, the computer will agree with most of his moves. The point I make with this, is that computer agreement with moves alone in one game is not enough, you must look at the moves themselves, and see if they are obvious moves, or something else.

    Not every game needs to be watched, but this could be streamlined into if you wish to submit a questionable game, then this could help filter out which ones the game moderators should look at.

    Also, how closely does Rybka, Crafty, and Fritz agree on most moves?
  11. Standard member Chipotle
    Pawn Grubber
    02 Aug '08 23:29
    This would really only apply after the game's novelty.

    A bigger issue is, if you send me information saying someone didn't pick one of the first three best moves, I know to look for a tactical shot. It won't always work, but you are providing information of a game in progress.
  12. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    03 Aug '08 00:20 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    After 5 moves have been played by either side.

    Rybka will analyse position for 5 minutes store top 3 replies
    and then send move onto opposing player.

    When the reply is sent if it is one of the chosen moves by Rybka,
    then system will advise both players that a 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice
    has been made.
    In certain tactical blowout games, the matchups for the winner may be quite high throughout the game. This will only encourage the losers to make more false cheating accusations.

    Edit: And chipotle has an excellent point in the post above mine. Discussion of games in progress is forbidden, so why should engine evaluation info be divulged to the players?
  13. 03 Aug '08 10:22
    Not too bad - I cuaght a handful.
    Surprised old S.G. popped up - thought he knew me by now.

    Joking aside:

    If we could come up something that the site could implement
    then I'm sure it would go a long way to prevent cheating
    and stop the suspicious from being paranoiac.

    If the cheats saw the system they were cheating indicate
    back to them (by means of a colour code) that the move
    they played could alert invesitgation then they would have
    to seriously consider what they are doing.

    Clean players have nothing to worry about at all.

    Of course I know a series of tactical moves will be 'only moves'
    and in some endgame situations it is possible for a player
    to see 16-20 ahead by simply counting.

    But a good player in the MOD team will see this at a glance
    and again the clean player will have nothing fear.

    The cheat on the other hand will feel uneasy, guilty, unsure...
    If we can just plant a seed of doubt in the cheats mind.

    The current methods may work at catching a cheat - after they
    have won x amount of tournaments. My joke idea which my may
    trigger an proper idea, is aimed at prevention.

    We are all chess players - chess players are meant to have good imaginations.
    Surley there is something that we can come up with between us
    that will indicate to a box user that the system knows what they
    up to they and they will play clean.