Originally posted by MilkyJoeNo, the moves are all made through the private message system and then the pgn is posted after every white move.
I'm curious and bored so I thought I'd ask, has anybody who votes on the moves had every move they voted for "win"?
Also, is there anywhere to watch this game other than the forum?
- Joined
- 01 Jul 08
- Moves
- 23826
Is this a game between PAWN RIOT and the highest rated player voting, or the forum? What I mean is, is there a very good player voting who gets all his moves made (so it's like PAWN RIOT VS that player, or truely a forum-voting system)? What if the higher-ratied player suggests a move but that move is out-voted?
- Joined
- 01 Jul 08
- Moves
- 23826
I suppose what I mean is, if the highest rating player isn't as good as PAWN RIOT, the collective chess brains of the forum would have no advantage?
I have no idea, I'm not very good at chess. I'm still fascinated by this game, and the concept, and will be following it. I won't contribute, it won't help.
Originally posted by MilkyJoeA 2100 with a forum full of blunder checkers can play pretty high level chess plus everybody has ideas to contribute that's will bring the group to a consensus. It isn't really about winning so much as it is about learning.
I suppose what I mean is, if the highest rating player isn't as good as PAWN RIOT, the collective chess brains of the forum would have no advantage?
I have no idea, I'm not very good at chess. I'm still fascinated by this game, and the concept, and will be following it. I won't contribute, it won't help.
- Joined
- 01 Jul 08
- Moves
- 23826
Originally posted by tomtom232Blunder checkers as well as blunder makers. I suppose the discussion side of it will help. Do people listen to comments then change their minds (or base thir decisions on the comments) then vote again? I'm not mocking the idea (I think it's great).
A 2100 with a forum full of blunder checkers can play pretty high level chess plus everybody has ideas to contribute that's will bring the group to a consensus. It isn't really about winning so much as it is about learning.
Originally posted by MilkyJoeDon't know yet. We're still in book at this momen... Once we get out of book participation might not be as high.
Blunder checkers as well as blunder makers. I suppose the discussion side of it will help. Do people listen to comments then change their minds (or base thir decisions on the comments) then vote again? I'm not mocking the idea (I think it's great).
I used to think that two inferior players would not be able to beat a stronger player...so I agreed to play two of the weaker players at my chess club. Together, they managed to draw me: but it was only because they didn't know which bishop to trade off during an endgame...in the end they had the wrong colored bishop and could not force my king out of a corner to promote a pawn. I am not a brilliant player by any means, but I was easily 600 points higher than them.
What does this mean? Well it seems to me that if these two lowely players could beat me, hopefully a forum of players can beat one player...and if we do lose then we can do a post-mortem with PAWN RIOT