Cheating With Secret Signs

[MostFamousDane]

I already proposed WCDF motion about pairing in earlier rounds (1-2) among players from the same country, but noone paid attention to my arguments.

Eh this was passed a long time ago ???

If you look at the cross table for Stonehaven at the WCDF website (http://wcdf.wz.cz/results.htm) the players from the same country met each other in the first round.

Sune

[kiwinurse]

I fully understand Pedro what you are saying,and how hard it must have been under those circumstances,without support from the players to do anything.Ive heard of several incidences over the years of wellknown people cheating in draughts,but they are given full permission too,due to the fact that the people that see them do it dont report it,which only undermines this game and leaves people feeling a bit disgusted not only with the person who did it,but with the authorities who knew about it and did nothing to stop it.It takes a brave person to come out and say something,knowing they could be stoned for it, but until that happens,cheating will continue.

[tommyc]

Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 194
Location: Ireland
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:49 pm Post subject: Re: Online National Teams Competition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

""You choose to define true checkers skill by OTB play. I define it by mail-play. Somebody else may think that blitz play is the true test. They different modes, and each is a skill in its own right. "says Pedro.

Checkers is supposedly regarded as scientific,but there is no science applied to OTB play its simply for one side or the other a game of chance wit and craft.

Blitz play is even more a game of chance.

The only science applied to checkers is in Mail play where complete analysis of move and counter move is examined.
To prove this ask the question why are OTB players not allowed to play Barred openings,simply b/c the are not scientifically proven draws!!

Im my opinion OTB players could in fact play Barred openings and 90%+ of them would draw.b/c of the possibility of the unknown win.

So if checkers is a proven science it is only a science in Mail Play,everything else is chance.
_________________
Dont let the person you are stop you from being the person you wanna

[mday]

Mail play is for players who can't play over the board. There is no proof of "chance" in OTB play or blitz play.

Probably one of the dumbest things posted on this forum "but there is no science applied to OTB play its simply for one side or the other a game of chance wit and craft. "

It isn't poker you donkey.

[Patrick Parker]

for me the first time me and mday agree
tho i dont know if you are a donkey ........

blitz.....um well....alot is missed true
less in a regular game
and perhaps less in mail
but

seeing your opponent in otb play......makes it more than worth it
id say......id rather not play than only play mail play as unless i lived in alaska or something because
the people are a good part of the game

maybe you are afraid of people

[Pedro Saavedra]

> seeing your opponent in otb play......makes it more than worth it
> id say......id rather not play than only play mail play as unless i lived in
> alaska or something because the people are a good part of the game
>
> maybe you are afraid of people

I love not people less, but love checkers more.

Seriously, I can talk to people at any time. I enjoy writing more than talking, and in the same vein I enjoy mail play more than OTB.

As for mail play being for people who cannot play OTB, I think Mac Banks and Dick Fortman are living counter-examples.

[Pedro Saavedra]

> seeing your opponent in otb play......makes it more than worth it
> id say......id rather not play than only play mail play as unless i lived in
> alaska or something because the people are a good part of the game
>
> maybe you are afraid of people

I love not people less, but love checkers more.

Seriously, I can talk to people at any time. I enjoy writing more than talking, and in the same vein I enjoy mail play more than OTB.

As for mail play being for people who cannot play OTB, I think Mac Banks and Dick Fortman are living counter-examples.

[Patrick Parker]

when was the last time either of them played in a tournament
also i would not use a grandmaster such as alex ....to say
since he can play mail play ...so could i
also....
i wasnt talkin about u......just following mdays comments with my owns thoughts


however fortman did at one time play otb....
mac also .....

but maybe years have passed since even mac has
and i wasnt talkin or thinking of either of them
also mr fortman did at one time go to tournaments i believe
where
are all these other mail players tournament records
if u can do it one way.....certainly since otb is the less scientific
and simplier way.....mail players can do it there also.....
to me this is similar to online players saying they are grandmasters or the best players of all time.....its about that solid.....

another thought.......its not really amazing to open a checkers book
play out a game.........
get a funky analysis on a program....and wait for someone to go down that path
i know that doesnt happen and that all mail players really .....just come up with these grand ideas on their own...but who are we really kidding

after saying many things ....which some may not like and certainly wont agree with
id like to also say i really enjoy mr fortmans games ....
the pre computer era in mail play..........was exciting im sure....
but as all postal players say........they dont use pcs.....because todays best programs arent as good as people ( yeah right ) and that they only use them for blunder checks.........if u cant see 2 for 1s....how scientific is it

[tommyc]

Your talking thru your hat Patrick...lol. If you agree with mday he aint got a clue and neither do you!!..

[EdTrice]

but as all postal players say........they dont use pcs.....because todays best programs arent as good as people ( yeah right ) and that they only use them for blunder checks.........if u cant see 2 for 1s....how scientific is it

It wasn't too long ago that WCC missed a win in a postal game against Kingsrow, even though WCC has an 8-piece database and searched for about a day (it was 2002 I think.)

Bear in mind that means Kingsrow, with its (at the time) 6-piece database and dropout expansion opening book, moved into a loss that it thought was a draw.

While a lot has changed since then, if I didn't see it and experience it myself, I wouldn't have believed it.

People used to put a great deal of faith in Computer Analysis. As an experiment, run up one of the doctor lines to the point where the program has to pitch a man going a piece down to save the draw. Turn off the opening books. Let the program search.

See how long it takes to announce the draw on infinite search mode.

And remember, the "Doctor" was a human player, I believe from the Scotish Moors, he used to play like that, from the 1840's or 50's!

The human mind is capable of deriving strategic concepts that a computer cannot verify tactically at this exact moment in time.

[jimloy]

Here is a mail game that I am proud of. You will find it annotated in my 2005 ACF International Mail Ty. book. I won it with the help of my computer.

[Event "2005 ACF International Championship Mail Ty., g.7"]
[Black "Loy, J."]
[White "Sutton, K."]
[Result "RW"]
9-14 24-19 5-9 22-18 11-15 18-11 8-24 28-19 4-8 25-22 8-11 22-18 11-16 29-25 3-8 26-22 1-5 27-24 16-20 32-28 20-27 31-24 8-11 24-20 9-13!(H) 18-9 5-14 30-26 11-15 20-16 15-24 28-19 14-17 21-14 10-17 16-11 7-16 25-21 16-20 21-14 20-24 14-9 6-10 22-18 24-27 19-16 12-19 23-16 27-31 26-23 31-27 9-5 10-14 18-9 27-18 5-1 18-14 1-5 13-17 16-12 17-22 12-8 22-26 8-3 26-31 3-8 31-26 8-11 14-10 5-1 26-22 11-16 22-18 16-19 18-14 RW

Now, the key move of the game is 9-13! at note H. I found this move (and verified its winning strength) after several hours of work, with the help of my computer. If I set up this position and ask my computer to find this winning move, all by itself, it will never find the move, not in a day, not in a week, not in a month. I found out later that D. Lafferty also found this move, so (unhappily for me) I was scooped.

I enjoy playing by mail. The few great moves that I find, with the help of my computer, give me great joy. My computer is a much stronger checker player than I am. But it is very likely much weaker than your computer. Together, as a team, my computer and I are stronger than most mail players, with or without computers. But there are a half-dozen or so players that I just can't seem to beat. But, I keep trying.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

I never played in mail - too tough for me. Mail play vs tournament play the same if we compare tournament play with online play !

Alex

[mday]

Canning, you never have a clue. You play mail play because you can't survive a minute in OTB minors division. LOL!

[Patrick Parker]

jim loy
my pc finds the value well over 100.....at 10 seconds search
before your note......
so do u mean 9-13?
with red to move
is where ?

[tommyc]

Hi Jim,Interesting and highly technical but from a quick look it seems apart from the bad 2724? a draw stille xists after that.

Your unfortunate opponent just played the WRONG waiter!!.Hence the loss.