Nombre de Usuario: Contraseña:
Registro de un Nuevo Usuario
Moderador: MrWCF 
 Camelot

Discuss about Camelot game or find new opponents.


Mensajes por página:
Lista de boletines
No tienes autorización para escribir mensajes en este boletín. Para escribir mensajes en este boletín se require un nivel mínimo de membresía de Brain Peón.
Modo: Todo el mundo puede escribir
Buscar entre los mensajes:  

<< <   1 2 3   > >>
2. Junio 2009, 21:59:47
Ceiter 
Asunto: Moving knights out of enemy castles
I was just looking at a game of mine where I have a knight in my opponent's castle. I was under the impression that once you move into your opponent's castle, you can never move out, but in this case BrainKing will let me move out.

I need to capture on this turn, and I can either capture one piece with a pawn, or two pieces by making a knight's chage out of the castle.

Is this a bug, or is it legal?

Game is here: Camelot (Ceiter vs. tenuki)

I'm not moving until I know the move is legit.

27. Mayo 2009, 07:23:02
MrWCF 
Asunto: Exhibition Games
Modificado por MrWCF (27. Mayo 2009, 17:09:38)
Within the next week or so, I will be playing a few exhibition games of Camelot against CHAXX, the World Champion Camelot computer program, on this site ( Camelot (Chaxx vs. MrWCF) ).  I suspect that my current unbeaten BrainKing Camelot record will quickly suffer extensive damage. 

21. Febrero 2009, 23:36:14
Styleone 
Asunto: Chivalry
hello,
What about the variant Chivalry? I would be very happy we can play it here too.

14. Febrero 2009, 23:45:34
AbigailII 
Asunto: Re: Camette
joshi tm: "Ultra-weak" means it's known what the result of the game will be (or cannot be) given perfect play by both players. PahTum for instance is ultra-weak solved in the sense that the second player cannot win (strategy stealing argument). But for a game to be solved ultra-weakly, you can prove the result, but you do not have to have a method reaching that result. Weakly solved means that you have a method for one player to force a win (or draw) from the starting position. Strongly solved means that you from any position what the result will be, and how to archieve that result with perfect play from both sides. Chess is partially strongly solved for up to 6 or 7 pieces (that is, for any legal chess position with at most 6 (or 7) pieces, optimal play for both sides is known)

14. Febrero 2009, 22:54:46
joshi tm 
Asunto: Re: Camette
Modificado por joshi tm (14. Febrero 2009, 22:56:40)
MrWCF: I read about the checkers game indeed it was weakly solved. I study maths, pity I did not learn anything about interesting Game Theories. What does the solving levels mean? By what perfect play, the games always draw?

Edit: I see the game board has lots more sides, piece connot be captured that easy. Interesting...

14. Febrero 2009, 19:51:26
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Camette
joshi tm: Camette has not been solved at any of the three possible levels (ultra-weak, weak, or strong).  However, in order for that to be true, White must choose one of the 10 opening moves (out of a possible 24) that do not result in forced loss.  Speaking of Checkers and Chess, by the way, as you may know, Checkers was weakly solved in 2007: it's a draw.

14. Febrero 2009, 13:43:07
joshi tm 
Asunto: Re: Camette
MrWCF: Is it a solved game then? Or is it a "not so easily solved game" just like Checkers and Chess?

14. Febrero 2009, 12:21:10
MrWCF 
Asunto: Camette
joshi tm:Thanks for your comments, joshi.  When I invented the Camelot variant of Camette, I never seriously expected it to avoid being "solved" for too long a period of time.  It appears, though, that 10 of the 22 possible first moves for White actually result in an equal battle--I was pleasently surprised!

14. Febrero 2009, 11:16:51
joshi tm 
I like Camelot. Although you have to be alert, for else a foul move often counts as 7 captured pieces. I think this hyper Camelot version should be added too ;)

http://www.worldcamelotfederation.com/Camette_Rules.htm

22. Enero 2009, 08:06:46
MrWCF 
Asunto: A Challenging Game, Annotated
Modificado por MrWCF (22. Enero 2009, 08:32:27)

I thought that I would annotate my game just completed against skinny18.  It was the most difficult Camelot game I've had so far on BrainKing.  Camelot (MrWCF vs. skinny18) 



White: MrWCF
Black: skinny18
16 January 2009
 
1.E6-G8 G11-G9
2.F6-H8 H11-H9
3.D6-F8 J11-H11
4.E7-C7? (The beginning of an unsound combination by White that leads to a loss of a Man.)
4....G9XE7
5.H6-F6 E7XG5
6.I7-G9XG11XI9XG9 H11-H10
7.G6XG4 H10XF8XH6
8.H7XH5 (White is up the one Man that he envisioned, but not for long.)
8....F11-F9! (When White played 4.E7-C7, he was completely blind to this excellent move by his opponent.  Threatened are both 9....F9xH7xJ5xJ7 and 9....C11-E9-G9xI7xI5xG5xG3)
9.J6-I5 F9XH7XH9 (Now White is a piece down.)
10.F7-E7 I11-I9-G9
11.D7-D6 I10-H10
12.H5-J7 G9-G8
13.G4-H5 E11-E9
14.J7-I8 H9XJ7
15.I6XK8 G8-H9
16.K8-L9 (Hoping to divert some Black pieces to the task of stopping this White end-around in the hope of evening up the forces in the center.)
16....H9-I10 (Taking the bait.  In Camelot, allowing one enemy piece to get around your forces and move toward your Castle is rarely dangerous.  On the contrary, it reduces the enemy's presence in the tactics-rich center by a piece.)
17.H5-H6 C11-E11-G9
18.E7-F7 G9-I11
19.C7-D7 D11-D9
20.L9-L10 H10-H11
21.L10-L11 I10-I12
22.I5-I6 I12-J13
23.H6-H7 E9-G11
24.I6-G8-E6 D9-D11
25.C6-C7 I11-I12
26.H7-G7 J13-K12
27.L11XJ13 I12XK14 (Black has stopped the White end-around, but at what cost.)
28.G7-E7 K14-J13 (Correctly attempting to get the Knight back into play.  Regardless of slightly questionable strategic planning, Black has played a tactically perfect game up to this point.)
29.D6-D8 D10-E9? (Finally, White gets a break.  This move loses material.  29....D10-E11 would have maintained Black's advantage.)
30.D7-D9! E9XC9 (Best.  30....E10xC8xE8xG6, 31.E6-E8xE10xG10xI12xK14 would have given White a two Knights for two Men advantage.)
31.C7-E9XE11XG9 C9-C8!? (Best was 31....H11-I12!, 32.D8-F6-F8-H10xF12 allowing White only a one Man advantage with plenty of counterplay by Black.  In this variation, White might have fallen into the clever trap of 32.E6-E8-C8xC10xE12? G11-G10!, 33.G9xG11 J13-H11xF11xD13 with a probable draw.)
32.D8-F6-F8-H10XH12XF10 (With a one Knight and one Man advantage.  Not 32.D8xB8 with only a one Knight advantage.  And certainly not 32.E6-G8-G10xI12xK14 C8xE8xE6xG8xG10 with a win for Black.)
32....D11-C10
33.E6-G8 C10-C9
34.E7-D7 C8XE6
35.F7XD5 RESIGNS 1-0
A tough game by my worthy opponent!


17. Enero 2009, 14:45:09
joshi tm 
Thanks. That saves 6 pieces because I thougt it was otherwise.

17. Enero 2009, 07:16:08
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re:
joshi tm: Yes.
If one of your pieces is in position to Jump one of your opponent's pieces, you must make a capture sometime during that move.  You can accomplish that mandatory capture either by the Jump, itself, or, if one is available, by a Knight's Charge.

17. Enero 2009, 06:34:22
joshi tm 
If you have to capture with pawns, are you allowed to make a knight's charge instead?

15. Enero 2009, 13:01:00
Pedro Martínez 
Asunto: Re: World Camelot Federation
MrWCF: Thank you for your response. I was thinking that a "world federation" should associate individual national associations and was wondering if there are any throughout the world. I guess that's not the case. Thanks again for making it clear.

15. Enero 2009, 07:37:11
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: World Camelot Federation
Modificado por MrWCF (15. Enero 2009, 08:24:57)
Pedro Martínez: Thanks for your questions, Pedro.
The WCF uses the word “Federation” as a synonym for “association” or “league.”  Ten years ago, when I formed the WCF, I could just as easily have chosen “World Camelot Association.”
The WCF uses the word “World” because the organization is open for free to anyone anywhere in the world.  Currently, the WCF has members in twelve different countries.  If I can ever manage to publicize the group, my preference would be to have at least one member in every country in the world.

15. Enero 2009, 06:48:16
Pedro Martínez 
Asunto: World Camelot Federation
I have just visited the website of the "World Camelot Federation" and two questions came into my mind: What makes the WCF a "world" federation and what makes it a "federation"?

15. Enero 2009, 06:40:35
MrWCF 
Asunto: Camelot World Championship Match
The WCF Camelot World Championship Match will begin at 10:00 a.m. EST on February 7, 2009, in Troy, Michigan, USA.  The best-four-out-of-seven contest will pit the challenger, Michael Nolan, against the current world champion, Dan Troyka.  This will be the first over-the-board Camelot World Championship contest in history.  The time limit will be 40 moves in 150 minutes.  Mr. Troyka has been Camelot world champion since 2003.  Mr. Nolan won a series of Candidates Elimination Matches under the auspices of the World Camelot Federation to earn the right to be the challenger.

14. Enero 2009, 17:10:23
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: An Interesting Cam Ending
AbigailII: Thank you, I'll do that in future messages, and I'll edit the two previous messages.  I appreciate your help!

14. Enero 2009, 11:32:12
AbigailII 
Asunto: Re: An Interesting Cam Ending
MrWCF: You might get more response if you make your references to games actual links.

14. Enero 2009, 08:47:29
MrWCF 
Asunto: An Interesting Cam Ending
Modificado por MrWCF (14. Enero 2009, 17:13:57)
Another interesting position, this time at the end of the Cam game between PerGioco and dragonchild (archive #3685011: Cam (dragonchild vs. PerGioco)).  The players agreed to a draw.  I believe that no Cam position is drawn--one player can always force a win--but that is unproven.  Do you think that this game is a draw, or a win for Black?  I would like to hear your intended strategy as Black to try for the win.

11. Enero 2009, 08:52:12
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

And finally, this game from the 2002-2003 Camelot World Championship Tournament



M. Nolan vs. P. Yearout
2002-2003 WCF Camelot World Championship Tournament
(Annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-G8 H11-H9
2.E7-F8 J11-H11
3.H6-H8 H9-I8
4.H8xJ8 (Not 4.H7xJ9 H11-H9xH7xJ7xJ5xH7xF9 or 4.I7xI9 H11-J11-H9xJ9)
....H11-J9xJ7xJ5
5.I7-I5xK5 E11-E9 (Threatening C11-E11-G9xE7xC5xC7xE7xG5)
6.F7-E7 I10-H11 (Threatening H11-F9xF7xH9)
7.G8-F7 C11-E11
8.K5-J6 D11-F9
9.J6-H6 I11-G9
10.I6-G8 F11-D9
11.G8-E8 H11-F11
12.E8xC10E11-C9xC11
13.G6-E8 H10-F12
14.F8xH10 G11xI9 (Not G10xI10 because of E8xG10xE12xG12xG10. Better was F11-H9xH11 with an even game. The text loses a piece)
15.H6-H8xJ10 D10-F8XH6xH8 (This loses outright to the text reply)
16.F6-F8 (All other moves allow equality)
....E9xG7
17.F7xH7xH9 (Now if G10xI8 then E8xG10xE12xG12 or if F11-D9xF7 then H9xF11xD9)
....Resigns 1-0


11. Enero 2009, 08:50:46
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

And still another....



Paul Yearout vs. Michael Nolan 1999
(annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-E8 H11-F9
2.C6-E6 J11-H11
3.H6-F8 E11-G9
4.G7-E9! F10xD8? (4....F9xD9, 5.E8xC10xC12 D11xB13, 6.I7-G7-E9xE11xC9 G11-E9, 7.E6-E8xE10xG12 H11xF13 is better)
5.F8xF10xF12? (5.J6-H8xF10xH12xJ10! I10xK10, 6.E7xC9xE11xG11xI11xG9xE9xE11 D11xF11, 7.I7-G7-E9-E7-G9xG11xE11 wins)
5...... D10-F10-H8xH6xJ8!
6.D7xD9xF11xH9xJ11? (6.D7-F9xH9xF11xD9xD7 H11-J9-J7xJ5xH7xF5, 7.F6xF4 C11-E11xG13 is better)
6...... H11-H9-F9xD7xF5xH7xJ5xJ7!
7.J11xH11xH9xF9 C11-E11xG13
and Black won in 50 moves 0-1


11. Enero 2009, 08:49:41
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

And another...



Dave Blizzard vs. Michael Nolan 1999
(annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-E8 H11-F9
2.H6-H8 E11-G9
3.H8-H6-F8 G11-E9
4.F7-D9?? (4.j6-H8-H6 with an even game)
4...... E9xC9?? (4......E10xC8xE6, 5.E8xE10xC12xC10xE10xG12 F9xF7xD7xD5xB7, 6.F6xD6 G10-F11, 7.G12xE10xG10xG8 J11-H9xF7xH5xJ7xJ5 wins)
5.C6-E6-C8xC10xC12? (5.J6-H8 F9xF7xD9, 6.C6-E8-E6-C8xC10xC12 D11xB13, 7.H7-H9 G10xI8xG8, 8.D7-F7-H7xF9xH9xH11xJ9 with an even game)
5...... F9xF7xF5? (5.... F9xF7xH5xJ7xJ5, 6.C12-D12 D11xD13, 7.D7-F9xH11xH9xF9xD11xD9 with advantage)
6.G6xE4 D10-D12xB12
7.D7-F9xH9xH11xJ9 J11-H11-F9xD7xD5xF3
8.G7-F8 E10-E9
9.F8xD10xD12 I11-I10
10.J9xH11xF9 F10xF8xD6
and White won in 31 moves 1-0


11. Enero 2009, 08:48:38
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

And another...



Michael Nolan vs. Dave Blizzard 1999
(annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-G8 E11-E9
2.G6-I8? (2.J6-H8-F8 with an even game)
2...... J11-H9xJ7xJ5
3.I7-I5xK5 I11-I9
4.H7-J5? (4.G8-G6 with an even game)
4...... H11-F9? (4.... H10-H9, 5.F7-H7-H5 D10-F8xH8, 6.K5-I5-I7xG9xE11 I10-G8xG6xE6xE8, 7.D7xF9xD9 E10xE12 with an advantage)
5.I6-H5? (5.I6-G6-E8 D10-F8xH8, 6.E8-E6-G8 F9xH7xH5, 7.F6-E6 I10-I8-G8xG6xE8, 8.D7-F7xD9xF9xH11xH9xH7 with an advantage)
5...... F9xH7
6.H6xH8xJ10 C11-E11-G9-I11xK9
7.J5-K6 G10-H9
8.G7-G8? (8.F7-G6 D10-F8xH6xH4, 9.D7-F7-H5xH3 is better)
8...... D10-E11?? (8....H9-H8, 9.G8xI8 E10-E8, 10.F7xD9xF9 I10-G10xE8xE6xG6xI4 wins)
9.D7-C7? (9.G8-E6 F10-D8, 10.E7xC9 D11-C10, 11.C9xC11 E9-D10, 12.C11xE9 E10xE8xG6xI4 wins)
9...... E11-G9xG7xE5
10.D6xF4
10...... I10-G8xE6xE8? (10.... E10-E8, 11.F7xD9xF9 F10xF8xD6xB6xD8 is better)
and Black won in 47 moves 0-1


11. Enero 2009, 08:47:37
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

Here's another annotated Camelot game.



Michael Nolan vs. Dave Blizzard 1999
(annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-G8 H11-F9
2.F7-H9 H10xH8xF8
3.E7xG9xE9 F10xD8
4.I7-G5-E7-C7xE9 (slightly better is 4.I7-G5-E7xC9 D10-F10-D12-B10xD8, 5.C6-E6-C8xE8)
4...... D10-F10xD8
5.C6-E6-C8xE8
5...... J11-H11 (slightly better is 5.... E11-F10)
6.E8-C6-E6 (slightly better is 6.H6-F8-D8)
6...... E11-E9 (slightly better is 6.... F11-H9)
7.H6-H8? (7.F6-E7 with an even game)
7...... E9-E8
8.D7-D5-F7xD9
8...... C11-E11-E9xC9 (slightly better is 8.... E10xC8)
9.G7-I9?? (9.D6-D7 is much better, though Black retains his advantage)
9...... I10xI8xG8
10.H7xF9 E10xG8
11.G6-H7?? (11.E6-F5 F11-H9-F7, 12.G6xE8 G8-G7, 13.F5-F7-D9xB9 G7xE5xC7 is much better, though Black retains his advantage)
11...... F11-E10?? (11.... G10-E12-C10-C8, 12.H7xF9 C9-C7xE5xE7xG5, 13.J6-H6xF4 F11-G10, 14.F9-G9 G10xG8 wins)
12.H7xF9 E10xG8
13.E6-F5 G8-G9
14.J6-H6 D11-E10
15.I6-H7 G9-H10
16.H7-H5 E10-E9
17.H6-G5 C9-D10
18.H5-G6 I11-G9
19.D6-E6 G11-I9
20.E6-G4 H11-I10
21.G5-G3 G10-H9
22.F5-H3-F3 H10-J8
23.F6-H6 I10-J9
24.F3-H3 D10-F8-H10
25.H3-F3 E9-F10
26.H6-H5 F10-G10
27.F3-F2 G10-I8
28.G6-I4 G9-G8
29.G3-G2 G8-H7
30.H5-F3 I9-I7
31.I4-H3 H10-H8
32.H3-F5 H9-G8
33.G4-G3 G8-I6
34.G3-F4 J9-J7
35.F4-F6 H8-J6
36.F6-F7 H7-G7? (36.... H7-G8, 37.F7xH9 I8xG10 with Black retaining his advantage)
37.F7xH7xJ5 J6xJ4
38.F5-G4 J4-J5
39.G4-H4 I8-I6?? (39.... J7-K6 with Black retaining his advantage)
40.G2-E2-G4-I4xK6xI8xK8 Resigns 1-0


11. Enero 2009, 08:46:12
MrWCF 
Asunto: Annotated Game

Here is an annotated game for inspection.



Paul Yearout vs. Michael Nolan 2001
(annotations by M. Nolan)
1.E6-E8 H11-F9
2.C6-E6 J11-H11
3.H6-H8 E11-G9
4.J6-H6 C11-E11
5.I6-G8 G11-E9
6.D6-F8 F11-H9
7.I7-G5? (7.H8-I9 H10xJ8, 8.H6-H8xH10xJ12 J8xH6xH8, 9.G7xI9xI11xG11 G10xG12, 10.G8xG10 E9xG7xG5, 11.E6-G6xG4 E11-E9-G9xG11, 12.E8xG10 F10xH10 is better)
7....... G9xI7
8.H6-H8xJ6 H10-G9? (8....F10-G9!, 9.F8xF10xH8 D10-F8xD6xD8xF8xH6xF4 wins)
9.F8xH10xH12xJ10xH10xH8 D10-F8xD8xD6xF8xH6xF4
10.H8-G7 F10-F8
11.G8xE8 E9xE7xE5
12.F6xD4 E11-F10
13.G7-H6 D11-E11
14.J6-I7 F4-F3
15.F7-G7 E11-G9
16.I7-I6 E10-G8
17.G7-G5 F10-F11? (17....F3-E2! with an even game)
18.G6-F7 G8xE6
19.I6-G8xE10xG12 G9-F8
20.G5-G4 F3xH5
21.H6xH4 E6-F5
22.H7-I8 F8-F7
23.I8-I9 Resigns 1-0


11. Enero 2009, 01:20:00
rod03801 
Asunto: Re: 2008-2009 WCF Camelot World Championship Tournament
Fencer: That would be great! I feel like I am stumbling around at this game, and would love to read about strategy. I've been too busy to take a look at some of the better players' games so far.

10. Enero 2009, 20:50:16
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: 2008-2009 WCF Camelot World Championship Tournament
Fencer: That sounds great!

10. Enero 2009, 20:11:02
Fencer 
Asunto: Re: 2008-2009 WCF Camelot World Championship Tournament
MrWCF: That's great. It would be nice to see some annotated games when the championship is complete. I would like to post some articles about Camelot strategy.

9. Enero 2009, 15:58:36
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re:
lukulus: Yes.

9. Enero 2009, 15:34:56
lukulus 
Is it possible to finish knight's charge on same field where it started?

9. Enero 2009, 15:08:06
MrWCF 
Asunto: 2008-2009 WCF Camelot World Championship Tournament

Just in case anyone is interested........


MrWCF (Michael Nolan) just won the Candidates Match portion of the subject tournament, so will challenge Dan Troyka of Saline, Michigan, USA, the current World Champion, for the Camelot World Championship.


It is my hope that during the next World Championship Tournament, many players from BrainKing submit entries. 


9. Enero 2009, 00:15:01
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Camelot Ending
Pedro Martínez: Can you outline your general plan to win as Black?

9. Enero 2009, 00:11:27
Pedro Martínez 
Asunto: Re: Camelot Ending
MrWCF: I believe I would win the game as Black.

8. Enero 2009, 11:39:14
MrWCF 
Asunto: Camelot Ending
Modificado por MrWCF (14. Enero 2009, 17:16:46)
Interesting position at the end of the Camelot game between chessik and SL-Bosse (archive #3599761: Camelot (chessik vs. SL-Bosse)).  The players agreed to a draw.  Do you think it's a draw?  Or do you think it's a win for black?  I'm pretty confident that I know the answer, but I would like to hear some opinions.

8. Enero 2009, 10:45:14
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Resignation
DarwinKoala: You know, I think that's probably much more true for a game like chess than for a game like Camelot.  In chess, for instance, much is to be learned from playing out a rook + 4 pawns vs. rook + 3 pawns ending, even if it's a clear win for the other player.  In Camelot, though, nothing much can be learned from a position where, for instance, two pieces have a clear path to the opposing Castle.  In cases like that, it's just a matter of tediously playing out all of the moves.

8. Enero 2009, 07:47:48
DarwinKoala 
Asunto: Re: Resignation
But sometimes the losing player wants to practice or understand an end game. Of course, there is always horses for courses.

Cheers,

DK.

8. Enero 2009, 06:44:23
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Resignation

AbigailII: In tournament chess, one method for punishing an opposing player who refused to resign was as follows.....


You have a king, rook, bishop, and four pawns.  Your opponent has only a king.  He won't resign.  Instead of mating with rook and king, you push all four pawns to promotion (queens).  Now you have four queens, rook, and bishop, and a crowd starts to gather around your table, all snickering about why he hasn't resigned.


Pretty cruel, I suppose, but it sure taught a tough lesson really fast.


8. Enero 2009, 03:17:53
AbigailII 
Asunto: Re: Resignation
MrWCF: Oh yes, I've noticed it as well. It annoys me too. I've even been yelled at for resigning with the argument my opponent didn't get the satisfaction of "moving out the last stones".

But there are other sites where it's worse. There's one site I play where resigning is actually punished (you get extra negative 'tie breaker points' making it harder to win a tournament if another player scored the same amount of match points).

As for your point 3), I've heard that often. I don't buy it. Little skill is needed to play out a position where the situation of the opponent is hopeless. No tactical or strategical action will happen that will be useful to the losing player. If the losing player wants to learn something, he'd be better off starting a new game instead of continuing a game that's lobsided.

8. Enero 2009, 00:45:28
MrWCF 
Asunto: Resignation
Modificado por MrWCF (8. Enero 2009, 00:51:08)

I would like to discuss something that appears to be commonplace behavior on BrainKing.


Let me preface my remarks by admitting that I've only been playing on this site for a short time, and then, almost exclusively Camelot, so perhaps my observations are only a holiday phenomenon, or perhaps they don't apply to other games.


Anyway, it is my impression that it is the norm here to continue playing the game, even when the outcome is obvious, and the cause is hopeless.  Resignation in that case seems to be the exception rather than the rule.


Let me be the first to point out a couple of things:


1.No player is forced to resign; obviously, each player has the absolute right to continue playing to the bitter end.


2.There are positions where a player seems to be hopelessly behind in material, yet has traps, tricks, attacks, or some other means of pulling a win or a draw from the jaws of defeat.


3.There is some benefit in continuing to play, and in so doing, learning from the technique displayed by the opponent as he or she moves on to victory.


That said, my background for over 40 years has been tournament (over-the-board) chess where if you are playing against a player much higher rated than yourself, and your position is hopeless with absolutely no chance to even draw the game, you resign.


I was just wondering if others have noticed this reluctance to resign in lost positions.


Again, I'm not complaining--it's every player's right to continue the fight!


4. Enero 2009, 11:23:35
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Cam
Fencer: I've added a list of differences between Cam and Camelot on the WCF website's Cam page (http://www.worldcamelotfederation.com/Cam.htm), and a link to those differences on the Cam Rules page (http://www.worldcamelotfederation.com/Cam_Rules.htm).  The differences between Cam and Camelot are:
1. The Cam board has 67 squares.  The Camelot board has 160 squares.
2. Each side in Cam has two Knights and five Men.  Each side in Camelot has four Knights and ten Men.
3. The object of Cam is to get one piece into the opponent's Castle.  The object of Camelot is to get two pieces into the opponent's Castle.
4. Victory in Cam also occurs if one side, even with only one remaining piece, captures all of the opposing pieces.  In Camelot, if the side capturing all of the opposing pieces has only one remaining piece, the game is a draw.  (Victory in Camelot by capture of all of the opposing pieces only occurs if the victorious side has two or more remaining pieces.) 
5. Stalemate in Cam is impossible.  Stalemate in Camelot is possible, and is a victory for the stalemating side if it has two or more pieces.
6. In Cam, if both sides have only one remaining piece, the game continues until one piece captures the other, or one piece enters the opposing Castle.  In Camelot, if both sides have only one remaining piece, the game is a draw.

4. Enero 2009, 09:45:38
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Cam
Fencer: That's a good idea.  In addition to the official rules, I could add some sort of addendum that points out the differences.  Thanks.

4. Enero 2009, 09:20:58
Fencer 
Asunto: Re: Cam
MrWCF: It is done. But it might be better if the WCF page shows just the difference between Camelot and Cam because it is not easy to find it comparing both full length rules.

4. Enero 2009, 08:20:43
MrWCF 
Asunto: Cam
Fencer: AbigailII has reported that a Cam position where each side had one piece was declared a draw.  I haven't inspected the position in question, but just in case, one vs. one is not a draw in Cam; in fact, it is always a win for one of the players, depending upon who has the opposition.

4. Enero 2009, 08:11:36
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: 1-1 in Cam

AbigailII: It is not a draw.  See the World Camelot Federation Official Rules of Cam: http://www.worldcamelotfederation.com/Cam_Rules.htm


I'll notify Fencer of this.


3. Enero 2009, 09:46:16
AbigailII 
Asunto: 1-1 in Cam
I was quite surprised that in Cam, a position with both players having one piece left was declared a draw. Unlike Camelot where you need to occupy your opponents castle with two pieces, in Cam, only one is needed for a win. With both players having one piece left (and the pieces had passed each other), it would have made much sense if the game continued.

31. Diciembre 2008, 07:18:51
MrWCF 
Asunto: Re: Did I lose this game?
Modificado por MrWCF (31. Diciembre 2008, 07:31:12)

DarwinKoala: If I might be forgiven for discussing some Camelot history....


You had a valid historical reason for wondering if being reduced to one piece constitutes a loss.  The current (World Camelot Federation) rule that governs, though, is:


The game is won if a player captures all of his opponent's pieces, and has two or more of his own pieces left.


This rule clarifies the question of whether two or more vs. one is a win.  It is not a win; its outcome, possibly a draw, is yet to be determined.  In the 1930 rules, and in the initial editions of the 1931 rules, a win by elimination required the elimination of all of the opponent’s pieces.  In later 1931 editions, however, the wording was changed to “elimination of all, or all but one, of the opponent’s pieces.”  This change in wording resulted from the fact that it is not possible for one piece to stop another (opposing) piece from entering its Castle.  Thus, if one side has two pieces and the other side one piece, it is impossible (with normal play) for the one to stop the two, even if the stronger side already has one of its pieces in the opponent’s Castle, and even if the weaker side temporarily has the opposition (a position where the pieces are on the same rank, file, or diagonal with an odd number of squares separating them, and the stronger side must move, thereby allowing the weaker side to stop the advance of the stronger side’s piece).  This change in wording, however, not only failed to take into account possible misplays by the stronger side; much more importantly, it failed to take into account situations where the weaker side could initiate a combination (a series of forced moves that leads to a significant change in positional or material advantage) that would, although reducing itself to one piece, reduce the stronger opposing side to one piece or no pieces, thus securing a draw.


So, when you're reduced to one piece you haven't lost yet.


Hope this helps!


31. Diciembre 2008, 05:11:54
Pedro Martínez 
Asunto: Re: Did I lose this game?
DarwinKoala: No, it's not feasible to force a draw from your position. It would be possible to draw the game only if your opponent underwent a lobotomy or something, but you can't FORCE a draw. :) As I said in my previous post, I believe you will lose the game in two moves. :)

31. Diciembre 2008, 04:59:31
DarwinKoala 
Asunto: Re: Did I lose this game?
Pedro Martínez: I did go back and read the rules ... For some reason I had thought that the game was lost when I was reduced to a single piece, not when all were removed from the board!

As a matter of interest - is it feasible to force a draw from this position?

Cheers,

DK

31. Diciembre 2008, 04:54:54
Pedro Martínez 
Asunto: Re: Did I lose this game?
DarwinKoala: Read the rules. You will probably lose the game in two moves.

<< <   1 2 3   > >>
Fecha y hora
Amigos conectados
Foros favoritos
Comunidades
Consejo del día
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, todos los derechos reservados.
Volver a arriba