|
|
#31
07-09-2007, 06:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chess needs a doubling cube
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think that with chess, the longer the game the less of a luck factor there is. I think in poker you can get away from your "A" game and still be profitable, but with chess it is more difficult to do so. [/ QUOTE ] I don't agree with this at all. Give a 2400 5 minutes and give a 2000 5 hours. The 2400 will still win just about every time. And at high levels, the games end in 6 hour games just like they do in 5 hour games - the person who makes the next to last mistake wins. In chess, alot of the game is subconscious. If you don't see a move within the few few seconds of looking at a position - 99% of the time, you're not going to find it no matter how long you look at it if you don't know that it's there (that is, tell a 1500 there's a win in a position and he can often find a move a GM missed but looking for something you don't know is there, is much different). The longer games might make the blunders more subtle or give a weak player a better chance of not doing anything entirely retarded, but it doesn't change the luck factor at all especially between nonamateur players. There's a reason the best players in the world at slow chess tend to also be the best players in the world at blitz/fast chess. [/ QUOTE ] lol, I dunno I'm not so excited giving 5 hours to 5 minute odds against a 2000-2100 player. I might be a favorite, but not by much. [/ QUOTE ] Let's go. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 
|
|
#32
07-10-2007, 12:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Chess needs a doubling cube
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think that with chess, the longer the game the less of a luck factor there is. I think in poker you can get away from your "A" game and still be profitable, but with chess it is more difficult to do so. [/ QUOTE ] I don't agree with this at all. Give a 2400 5 minutes and give a 2000 5 hours. The 2400 will still win just about every time. And at high levels, the games end in 6 hour games just like they do in 5 hour games - the person who makes the next to last mistake wins. In chess, alot of the game is subconscious. If you don't see a move within the few few seconds of looking at a position - 99% of the time, you're not going to find it no matter how long you look at it if you don't know that it's there (that is, tell a 1500 there's a win in a position and he can often find a move a GM missed but looking for something you don't know is there, is much different). The longer games might make the blunders more subtle or give a weak player a better chance of not doing anything entirely retarded, but it doesn't change the luck factor at all especially between nonamateur players. There's a reason the best players in the world at slow chess tend to also be the best players in the world at blitz/fast chess. [/ QUOTE ] lol, I dunno I'm not so excited giving 5 hours to 5 minute odds against a 2000-2100 player. I might be a favorite, but not by much. [/ QUOTE ] Let's go. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You are above 2100.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
