Women and Youth.

[Pedro Saavedra]

Billyboy is just saying there are ALTERNATIVES to what is already availble on the ACF corriculim.........good point Billyboy.

And what I say is that it used to be that when we picked up ACF material we could read about mail play events and that there were inter-district and US tournaments. I am saying that the same should be the case for turn-based events today. Not to replace crossboard play, but to bring into one fellowship the entire community of checker players, both crossboard and turn-based. If today somebody wanted to organize a United States turn-based championship, we should be able to negotiate beforehand to get the ACF to recognize the winner as US champion in that mode of play. Negotiations might include requirements of membership (e.g. every player must be at least an associate member) guarantees of no cheating and sensible rules (e.g. a committee approved by ACF can be set up to handle any claims of computer use and to approve the rules) and the results should be published in the bulletin along with any games judged worthwhile.

We have several overlapping checker playing communities. We have discussed the fact that some members of the on-line communities are not interested in playing crossboard (the discussion focused on youth) and this was seen as something that should be remedied, strictly for the sake of the crossboard community. I am saying that the two should be brought closer together. I want to be able to pick up the ACF Bulletin and read about turn-based events and be able to play over any interesting games by some of our excellent on-line players. I want to see international matches like the one that took place in IYT and have the match covered by the ACF Bulletin or the web site. I want to see the title "Turn-Based Master" awarded to the best of the best, where the qualifier will not confuse the title. In short, I want to see the same treatment once given mail play.

I spent 20 years in isolation from checkers, when I left Illinois and moved to Maryland. There is no club and as far as I have seen, only one other player in Maryland (and he lives several hours away). When I discovered Internet play, I returned to the game, and rejoined the ACF. I was delighted to find the stuff of legend playing on-line (Dick Fortman, Mac Banks, etc.). But I still find people who feel crossboard checkers are the only kind. If we can get on-line players who do not want to play crossboard to join the ACF, to see their events supported (I do not mean financially -- I mean officially recognized and reported) we can expand the ACF. If that expansion results in more crossboard players (or players who play in both modes) that will be good, but that should not be the only goal. Incorporating turn-based players into the checker playing community, and cross-feeding of analysis and players (for those who want it) between the two communities is the goal that I hope may be pursued.

[BillyBoy]

Benard, Pedro and myself was having a discussion without insults. So as I stated earliar lets keep this on a professional note on the forum. In my opinion which is just how I think I feel postal play or any kind of play against a opponent to use books or any kind of outside help is not fair and can be considered cheating. You can call it learning or having fun whatever but its not pure competition being spoon fed through a game. Pedro thanks for touching up what you meant about online play. It will be no harm in online tournaments if nothing is at risk and no money involved. I thought you was hopeing for online play to have the same status meaning ratings, championships money etc. Billy

[Pedro Saavedra]

Benard, Pedro and myself was having a discussion without insults. So as I stated earliar lets keep this on a professional note on the forum. In my opinion which is just how I think I feel postal play or any kind of play against a opponent to use books or any kind of outside help is not fair and can be considered cheating. You can call it learning or having fun whatever but its not pure competition being spoon fed through a game. Pedro thanks for touching up what you meant about online play. It will be no harm in online tournaments if nothing is at risk and no money involved. I thought you was hopeing for online play to have the same status meaning ratings, championships money etc. Billy

Championship money should come from what the participants are willing to raise. If postal players organized a tournament with a cash entry fee, should not they be able to establish a prize fund? As for ACF funds, never at a loss to ACF. But if on-line tournaments could be shown to attract many new ACF members, then it would be in the interest of ACF to promote them.

I do not like rating systems, but if we had them for turn-based on-line play, they should be distinct from the crossboard ratings. Same for the titles. We have had a US mail play champion. That is not to be confused with the US Champion and nobody confused it.

Now for one quibble. Crossboard players use books too. They simply study and memorize many lines. That is not all they do, of course, and neither does the turn-based or mail player. But if you showed Alex a line, there is a good chance that he might be able to tell you that it was a cook by Oldsbury in a match with Tinsley. If there is something I would guess Alex and all the great players have been is students of the game. To that they add good intuition, good analytic ability and so forth.

Now, I picked up the game late in life and went 20 years without playing it. I also do not have the time I would like to study the openings, So I figure I play in a more even field if we are allowed to look at the book while we play, instead of only *before* we play. And I like to feel the link to the great players who played the same lines. And, of course, I enjoy the game more when I know my opponent is also looking at the books. The post-mortem in those cases can be particularly enjoyable.

Finally I will say that the reason I enjoy chess and checkers more than many other board games (e.g. Pente, Reversi, Lines-of-Action, etc.) is precisely books. I like game with a history, games that people have written about, and where there is plenty of literature. This, of course, is also true of many crossboard players. The main difference is in whether one studies the books beforehand or consults them during the play. I happen to prefer the latter because the former favors players with many more years of play than I have.

[BillyBoy]

Pedro, You seem like a very nice person to talk too. But your also a bit of a robot nothing said you really take into consideration just what you think is right. I tried countless times to explain this to you so a friend told me to explain it this way it might help. You and me will play a online tournament I will use a program against you and you can mail me a check or money order in the mail once I win our tournament. And you can call me a online world champion which does sound good. Do you think members of the ACF will sponsor our event? Talk to Alan see if he will aprove it for me. And by the way where in Maryland might you live I too live in Maryland. Billy

[Pedro Saavedra]

Pedro, You seem like a very nice person to talk too. But your also a bit of a robot nothing said you really take into consideration just what you think is right. I tried countless times to explain this to you so a friend told me to explain it this way it might help. You and me will play a online tournament I will use a program against you and you can mail me a check or money order in the mail once I win our tournament. And you can call me a online world champion which does sound good. Do you think members of the ACF will sponsor our event? Talk to Alan see if he will aprove it for me. And by the way where in Maryland might you live I too live in Maryland. Billy

It is the case that the possibility of cheating exists in on-line checkers. I always existed in mail play, even before computers. Players could always show their games to a team of analysts and thus not be the one making the moves. That did not stop the great mail players from shining. Very few of my books survived my 20 year hiatus. One of less than a half dozen was a book by Dick Fortman on one of his mail play matches. I enjoyed going over those games more than if I were standing by a board watching a game at a crossboard tournament.

Several web sites do have committees that examine accusations of cheating by using computers. It may be that avoiding cash prices is best to avoid attracting any cheaters. Personally, I would prefer a little trophy or a book autographed by an author I admired. I doubt that many players would use a computer to win the Nebraska State Turn-Based Championship if all that was at stake was a trophy.

Incidentally, I would not mind seeing some computer-assisted tournaments. If both parties agree to allowing a computer assist them, and both are great players, I bet we would have some really high caliber games. Again, the key is being above board in what is allowed.

I refuse to lose any sleep on account of the possibility of an opponent cheating, and with most opponents I have gotten to know, I do not have this worry. But what I want to do is generate good checkers, amd on-line I can do it to a much greater degree than I could crossboard.

[BillyBoy]

Hi Pedro, Spoken very well good logic this time. A trophy is always nice but seems very rare to get in tournaments not just with your idea online but in crossboard play. What part of maryland do you live in? Billy

[Pedro Saavedra]

Hi Pedro, Spoken very well good logic this time. A trophy is always nice but seems very rare to get in tournaments not just with your idea online but in crossboard play. What part of maryland do you live in? Billy

I live in Kensington, in the Washington suburbs. In this area pool checkers is much more popular than our kind.

When I was active in chess I had that argument with many other players. Hoping to attract masters, tournaments started charging large entry fees and offering large prizes. I preferred trophies and books and lower entry fees. The most I ever won was $100 at the Eastern Open for the Class B prize in the 1960s. In those days any money we made went into the family pool (we were recent immigrants) so I cherished the trophy more than the money. But as the professionals got into tournament organizing, entry fees went up and so did prizes, and trophies became a rarity. In a sense, chess had moved beyond my pleasure zone, and that is in part why I switched to checkers.

So we need to attract Masters. Waive the entry fee for the best of them (i.e., invite them) and channel all the money to the top prizes. That is only fair given the time they need to invest. But the rest of us should play for the love of the game.

When I want to make money I provide statistical services for government surveys. Checkers I play for fun.