An annotated game idea

I really like what Zucchini et al. are doing with their annotated games. One semi-drawback I do see is that, once the annotations catch up with the moves, the moves may be affected by the opponent's annotations-- that is, it won't be exactly analogous to a real game where you usually don't know what your opponent is plotting.

It would be neat to have an RHP game with parallel private annotations for each move, with both players' annotations uncovered and posted at the end of the game.

Such a game would give real access to the thought processes of both players. If the players were at different levels it might provide a window into the differences in perception between players of differing ability, and hence into what makes a good player good.

Would anyone be interested in playing such a game with me? (I would prefer to play a roughly equal or more skilled player, as I doubt the annotations of a less skilled player than me would be very useful to anyone).

I don't think there's any mechanism for keeping private move-by-move annotations on the site itself, but I would be happy to maintain a separate annotation on each move in a text file, then combine my annotations with my opponent's at the end of the game before revealing them for the scorn/admiration of the RHP public.

If anyone is interested in this, send me a PM and let's get a game going!

Originally posted by jgvaccaro
...once the annotations catch up with the moves, the moves may be affected by the opponent's annotations

Originally posted by jgvaccaro
I really like what Zucchini et al. are doing with their annotated games. One semi-drawback I do see is that, once the annotations catch up with the moves, the moves may be affected by the opponent's annotations-- that is, it won't be exactly analogous to a real game where you usually don't know what your opponent is plotting.

It would be neat to ha ...[text shortened]... of the RHP public.

If anyone is interested in this, send me a PM and let's get a game going!

Originally posted by TovMauzer
Probably even more interesting would be posting comments along with moves, not after the game on the simple condition: each player posts in the separate thread and does not read opponent's thread till the game is over. I would be glad to participate in such game as soon as my game load will come to "normal" - hope to achieve this in a couple of weeks.

Bumpity bump. Anyone interested in this yet? I'd be up for going through the game pretty slowly (say, 1 move per player per day), and would be happy to play unrated.

I'll bite. Experimentation is good :-)

Cool! Like I said, I'll probably take it pretty slow, as I'm heavy on games right now and actually articulating a rationale for my moves will be a new and challenging experience for me. 🙂

Would you prefer to do it in separate threads (in which case I wouldn't read your thread, and vice versa), or just keep the annotation privately and post it at game's end? Either way works for me.

Originally posted by jgvaccaro

Would you prefer to do it in separate threads (in which case I wouldn't read your thread, and vice versa), or just keep the annotation privately and post it at game's end? Either way works for me.

Originally posted by paultopia
Privately's probably slightly easier, though it doesn't much matter.

Originally posted by jgvaccaro
Ok, let's try it that way then-- I'll keep my notes in a separate file and we can combine/post the notes at the end.

Send me over a challenge! White or black, unrated or rated, either is fine with me.

And thanks! I think this will be a helpful experience for me.

I'd be willing to have a go at this too. I'm a bit higher rated than Jake, but not outrageously so.

We did a series of this sort of thing in our clan. Unrated games where we messaged each other about why we were doing what we were doing. Sometimes the discussion was pretty general, but sometimes we got into relatively concrete annotations. Here's an actual sample of one of mine (copied and pasted from the message log):

Oh, I'm not saying that the game is yours. I was trying to do a bit of evaluation and was saying that with the pawn structure as it was, I would have already had a won endgame then. (Just take all the pieces off the board from that position and see what I mean.) I'm usually happy enough to simplify to a won endgame. However, in this case, I had to take your bishop and you got to retake with the pawn, which is a big help to your structure so I was reluctant to do it. If I had thought you would retake with the rook, I would have made the trade in a flash. (Well, this isn't supposed to be that kind of game, but you get the picture.) As it is, I am reluctant to trade knights for the same reason. I would much rather play b6 and let you take my knight on c5, but you wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) do that because it would let me take back with the pawn, eliminating my doubled pawns. What I am worried about is if I were to play 20...b6 and you played 21.Rd6! That could ruin my position pretty thoroughly. For example, 21...Rb8 22.Nxc5 bxc5 23.Rc6 threatening both my c5 and a6 pawns, as well as moving your other rook to the d file. So, when it comes down to the crunch, I have to do something with my knight. I could move it to a4 and take it out of the action :-( or I could move it to d7 and accept a permanently cramped game following 21.Rd6 Ke2 22.Rfd1 Rhd8 where you will have a lasting initiative and space. So my only real alternative is to take your knight so that you have to take my knight back and can't play Rd6 immediately.