BrainKing - Discussion boards (BrainKing.com)

Moderator: Hrqls

, coan.net

, rod03801

BrainKing.com

Board for everybody who is interested in BrainKing itself, its structure, features and future.

If you experience connection or speed problems with BrainKing, please visit Host Tracker and check "BrainKing.com" accessibility from various sites around the world. It may answer whether an issue is caused by BrainKing itself or your local network (or ISP provider).

World Of Chess And Variants (videos from BrainKing): YouTube
Chess blog: LookIntoChess.com

List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn.

Mode: Everyone can post

8. May 2007, 19:24:11

rabbitoid

show this user posts | show thread | link

I add my voice to the "agree" crowd, for a different reason: because everyone creates "all game" tourneys, there are far too many. Either people set the minimum number of participants too high, and they never start for lack of participants, or they set it low and we have a zillion "tourneys" with 4 participants, which is not much fun.

One may hope that "official" tournaments, if not run too often, may solve this problem.

8. May 2007, 22:13:41

gambler104

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

rabbitoid: I really like the idea as well but for a completely different reason. I think it is a good alternative to the rating system and stairs which can be manipulated. The official tournament winner can rightfully declare himself best at a game presuming all players are allowed to play.

8. May 2007, 22:28:34

toedder

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

gambler104: I also like the idea of a BrainKing Championship.

9. May 2007, 00:13:47

goodbyebking

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

Gordon Shumway: Congratulations, Tenuki, on winning the proposed future BrainKing Championship!

9. May 2007, 00:51:44

MadMonkey

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

emmett: We wont get very good odds at the betting shop for that

8. May 2007, 22:43:01

alanback

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

gambler104: Not quite true in backgammon, because of the luck factor. Still, a tournament winner would be "one of the best". Match length should be sufficiently long to reduce the effect of luck, say 15 or 21 points.

9. May 2007, 01:07:43

gambler104

show this user posts | show thread | link

Subject: Re:

alanback: good point