Probably true. I have a heck of a time getting on too and I hate it but I like to be optomistic about the future. IYT has hundreds of thousands of members, years of experience, severe restrictions on non-members, advertising and fancy prices and they still have glitches. I like to think Fencer will do better given some time and support.

Chief..not sure that so many now paying members will pay when the membership expires if no improvements are made..at least i know one who wont :)

The irony is the solution is more paying members. Not fewer. Then we get new server.

This week its terrible! Everytime I try to logon, I have to keep trying and trying to get access the site and once I am on it takes me 30 minutes to play 1 game.. :-( After every move, I most of the time I get the "BrainKing.com - Please wait" site... And this also count for sending/reading messages... *big sigh - It looks like it only gets worse...

I thought the paying members got priority in access?

Anyway.. would it be an idea to get time added, everytime you cannot access the site?? Games are running out of time, because I cannot access and/or play them..

Its not our fault that we cannot sign in, so could you please consider to give us back any extra time, Fencer?? :-)

In good Fellowship,
~*Radiant*~

This week its terrible! Everytime I try to logon, I have to keep trying and trying to get access the site and once I am on it takes me 30 minutes to play 1 game.. :-( After every move, I most of the time I get the "BrainKing.com - Please wait" site... *big sigh - It looks like it only gets worse...

I thought the paying members got priority in access?

Anyway.. would it be an idea to get time added, everytime you cannot access the site?? Games are running out of time, because I cannot access and/or play them..

Its not our fault that we cannot sign in, so could you please consider to give us back any extra time, Fencer?? :-)

In good Fellowship,
~*Radiant*~

Yeah..think Mr Fencer has to do something soon if he wants the site to survive, people are leaving

you're right - yesterday and today - a pain in the butt ...
worst ever - even with only 30 players online I was not able
to play 3 moves in row, from 4 pm to 10 pm on wednesday,
today similar ... just 60 players and loading takes decades ... :( ... ~*~

Any idea when this site will be fixed?, today was worse than ever to acces it!!..No improvement made since i joined...(PAID!!!!) in march.

UIL and Tactician-- I think the number of games played by an opponent should be irrelevant. Why does it matter? Once a player is established, who cares? I think ti is absurd that I gain more opints winning a game against a 2000 player with 50 games than against a 2000 player with 45 games.

Nope. BKR is always calculated with the same formula, regardless on the game ending type.

Is it true that if you lose a game by letting the time run out it effects your BKR less than being checkmated? I ask because one of my opponents (munwest) has realised I have got him in such a position that he can't avoid being caught in checkmate next move, so he tells me he's going to let the time run out rather than let me checkmate him. Does this effect my BKR aswell?

You just have to fish around ;-) Better DB system will be added later.

Thanks again BBW! BTW, while I'm here, does anyone know a good way to follow the thread of a message on these boards, or do you just have to fish around?

Yes, that link works good!

BBW (BIG BAD WOLF)

For that you're right, but they don't count the 10 or 20 year old games played by Kortsnoi or Karpov in there actual rating

Well, its not in the formula, but FIDE marks players like that to keep their rating list up-to-date. They don't recalculate the rating or anything just remove it from their Top 100 List. Bobby Fischer still has a 2700+ rating, he just isn't shown on the list.

It is also in the Elo, they mark ratings from player who did not play enough games in the last year with an *, anyhow the FIDE (The world chess federation)does so, I am not familiar with the USCF way to handle this

That isn't in the Elo system which is what the USCF uses, which is what we use. A ratings system that takes into account dates is Glicko and Glicko2.

Fencer, normally ratings are only calculated over the games played in the last 12 month (older games does not count anymore) Are you planning to do so also in the future?

lol...
It seems for me that there is one time a day (approximately the same time every day) in which i cannot log on at all. But other than that, it works great for me! (There might be more times when it's crowded, but i wouldn't know of them ;-) )

yesterday i had problems getting in :(
This AM....I could only play about 6 games from 25?? in 30 minutes
I have just played 25 games approx in an hour and a half....are we having problems again?
FENCER.....could you please tell me approximately how many games are current on this site at any given moment..approximately :)
would it help to speed up the site to shorten the times before moves?
Maximum of 7 days....I cant beleive that there are people that can only log on once a fortnight/month...perhaps I'm out of touch with the real world LOL

The true Elo system's provisional system (25 games) is +400 on your opponent rating for a win, -400 on your opponent rating for a loss, then that is added to (your provisional rating times the number of games you've played). Then divided by your new total of games. This site has a rating catch that prevents you from gaining points with losses and losing points with wins. Therefore, it is not a true Elo rating system. For a tie you just take your opponent's rating no adjustments made and add it in.

Your rating certainly can drop from a win...only if it's provisional. Ratings can do very strange and unexpected things if they are provisional, which is why i sometimes think ratings should not be shown at all until 25 games have been completed. But I'm not saying it should be changed. If your rating it established, it will never lower for a win.

Thanks for everyone's input. I understand it now, but still disagree with it. Have good games all!

Joe

Its not very often draws occur in the usual run of things, which is why people can't really boost their ratings by drawing all the time.
Of course its not the object of playing the game, but if I play a much higher rated player, then a draw is much better than an outright loss! Dano describes it well, a 'little loss', or even a 'little win' for the lower rated opponent!

that's not correct ... a tie against somebody whom
you should defeat due to your much higher rating is a loss.

chess grandmasters have to make average 66 % against
international masters, or they'll lose their rank after a while ... ~*~

PS - thumbrule: don't tie against somebody with ratings
400-500 lower than yours - that's considered being a 'little' loss

NO no no, the object of playing a game is not to get a draw.If that were the case you's see alot of people with high BKR's! A TIE is a TIE...nothing gained, nothing lost.

Oh no, if you win a game, even if your opponent has a much lower rating, your rating will not drop. If you draw or lose, however, then that will affect your rating.

A Provisional player on GoldToken can lose a TON of ratings points and really crash in the ratings by WINNING if it's against the wrong opponent. (much lower rated) but I don't think it's the same here.

Well it does make sense really. If I have a draw against a much higher rated player than me, then I must have worked hard to pull off a draw. Therefore my rating should go up. Just not as much as if I'd actually won the game!

can't be, ive had draws before and not lost any. and besides, a draw is a TIE. I didn't lose, thus shouldn't lose any bkr at all. that mean my opponent GAINED bkr for not beating me? makes no sense.

ps. theres nothing about draws and BKR in the FAQ.

Have a look in the FAQ's, CannibalJoe. It has a full explanation of ratings there. But I think basically if your opponent was quite a bit lower (rating wise) than you, and it was a draw then you will lose points.

I dropped 6 pts in my BKR today after a DRAW. Someone explain that one to me.

I am glad to hear that they aren't restricted from moving the tournament along... but it also sounds like another incentive to remain a pawn...

my suggestion to try to encourage non-members into buying a membership and to free the server for the paid members .... (and I know no one will like it) .... is too limit the number of moves per day for pawns... that way they still have all the features they have now.. and perhaps there would be a more positive response to a message saying you have reached your limit of moves for today .. instead of the server has reached capacity check back later...

There are no restrictions on second and next rounds.

OK, I don't think I have seen this question before, and it is something that might happen in one of my tournaments soon.

I have a tournament with 2 sections. Section #2 is complete with a pawn as the winner. (Section #1 has 3 more games to go).

My question is, if the pawn is up to 20 games when the second round starts, will he forfet the tournament games or get more the 20 games?

Thanks!

BBW (BIG BAD WOLF)

Just an idea Fencer: give us any idea of the price for a new server and offer a lifetime Brain rook membership for the one that finds a source or sponsor who can provide the server or the money to buy one

Why restrict seeing members who are online or friends or enemies? Those make no sense whatsoever. I, along with many others I know, would probably buy a membership here if we could a decent server or reliability. I have DSL and I can get into everyother site but at times like 4-8pm 6-8am its impossible to get in. Probably 1/10 tries in those time frames. It either brings up server maxed out or just nothing and it keeps trying to load.

Okay gentlemen :-) it was just a thought; while reading the previous messages, this boggled up.. But, thanks for explaining the obvious more technical part concerning the site performance.. :-) Hopefully the bug will be recognised soon and this site will be smooth again.

~*Radiant*~

Radiant-- storing old messages uses almsot no resources. message opsts are veyr small to begin with, in terms of how much space they take up, and additionally, site performance has little or nothing to do with how much data is stored.

Storing a few messages in db doesn't really affect the operations of the site (unless something really stupid has been done when setting db up) - and as Fencer pointed out, the problem is not with slow operation, but rather a bug in the server.

As for me becoming a paying member, it's a bit off topic here, and as far as I'm concerned a closed one too (for now anyway).

I know someone from Finland playing here as a paying member Rook: "kitti"

Perhaps he might be able to help you with the paying proces?

Goodluck :-)

I have yet read some of the postings here concerning the slow responce time of the servers BK is running on. It´s good to see, that people in here are positive to find solutions together, but I have too little time to read all of the postings, sorry :-)
So, what i want to add here, perhaps someone already mentioned it before - then sorry again.. :-)

This counts for ALL boards: the fellowship boards as well!

Remarks:
*Why do we still have the opportunity to read posts from the date this site started?

*Does anyone in here really looks up threads posted in December f.e.?

*Does any thread goes really back 3 months ago?

I mean to say here, that we possibly don´t need all those extra pages. Why not delete every 2 monts the past posts? I can imagine, for boards as BK.com and Features.. boards directly pointing to the core of this site; you want to keep all of the idea´s players have posted. But those perhaps you might be able to store those at a backup server. Keep them off from the mainserver.

It´s just a thought..

And perhaps concerning the Messagebox: add the feature to save messages and align that DB also on a backupserver..

Just a few thoughts.. :-)

Anytime :o)

The Rat: See Jetty homepage.

Thanks harley, but I'll wait and see a bit further. 10-18 dollars (or even more) is not much, but the trouble of sending it and such is a pain in the ass... Besides, I don't really need any of the extra services at the moment (maybe when my holidays start - this really messes up my work). Anyway, I like to see how the site's operating for a bit longer before I go to all the trouble.

Fencer: what? Testing everything all at once is the _only_ way to do it!!! :D

OK, I appreciate what you're doing, I really do. And I can really understand how having a regular, full time job can seriously affect your normal life = this site. :)

BTW, is the deadlock caused by the Mortbay Jetty application server? It's about the only component on your technical info page I'm not familiar with, and would really like to know if it has some bugs (for further use)...

Edit: Hmm... It seems to say that it's the database driver... Forget I asked. :)

Nope, only one of them. But thanks to the second processor I am able to handle the deadlock without hard restart of the whole server - which could take up to one hour.
There are no other reasons for 100% CPU usage. I've been monitoring it each day during several months and I know where the problem lies. But, of course, killing threads is only one possibility that can be tried, there are more options, I simply cannot test them all at once :-) You know, this site is not my full-time job.

The Rat, there are many other ways of paying for a membership, right down to sending cash through the post :o)
There are a number of representatives found at BrainKing.info that can discuss alterative payments with you.

Edit... none are from Finland as far as I am aware but we would all do our best to advise you if you like.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that you had two processors in your servers, and any java thread would run on only one of them... Is all of the processing done on one thread or does downtime only happen when two (or more) threads are maxed out?

Anyway, killing those threads after given time-out is probably not a good idea, as there might be other reasons for 100% cpu usage (like: a lot of users - killing the thread would only make things worse). Of course if that's all that can be done, then that's what must be done... :(

I'd really love to try and help you out, but:
a) I don't have the time
b) I don't know enought of your system
c) you seem quite competent your self :D

Thanks for the site anyway. Maybe some day I'll even pay something (for the record, the reason I'm not a paying member is that I don't like to pay on the net with anything except Nordeas "button payment" - and that's only implemented here in Finland, possibly in some other northern european countries too). :)

To make it clear - when a deadlock occurs, it simply means that one "thread" is consuming all CPU resources, most likely due to an infinite loop or similar problem. In such case, redirecting non-paying members to the Server Down page does not help. What I would like to implement is some reliable framework for "killing" such offending thread after it was consuming more than 90% of CPU resources for, say, one minute. This task is more related to Linux than Java and has almost nothing to do with the BrainKing.com application.