Series : Good guys vs Bad guys – Table of Contents
Duplicate : I had this idea in 2021 soon after I started to get back into chess & 9LX, w/c was in late 2020.
I got back into chess & 9LX then largely because of The Queen’s Gambit, w/c might explain how I came up w/ this idea to combine move sealing / adjournments w/ correspondence. It’s unlikely someone hadn’t already thought of it, but I’m not sure what terms to look up to find out if someone bothered to type up this folklore. But perhaps I’m the 1st to type this up because only a 9LX fan really thinks of ways to fix chess.
In 2020Nov, PastLie suggested this in r/chess960 ( post ID k344zd ) & r/chess ( post ID k343wb ).
Quote :
chess960 correspondence?
Recently started playing correspondence chess (2 days per move) and its awesome. These are the pros i noticed:
You can play whenever you want. Just 5-10 minutes a day is enough.
You can enjoy chess without time trouble pressure.
You make way less silly mistakes. Your games end up being beautiful, whether you win or not.
The problem i am facing now is that the openings that worked for me in bullet and blitz are sometimes going into very dull equalish positions. I dont really want to learn new openings either. Which brings me to chess960.
If there are any chess960 lovers who haven’t played correspondence, you should give it a try.
Or any correspondence players who haven’ t played chess960, why not try it? could be interesting.
I am on lichess.org and chess.com. Anyone interested in having a chess960 correspondence game can dm me.
Soon after I read the post in early 2021, I started … and then soon ended playing correspondence. Lol. In 2021Oct, made posts in r/chess ( post ID q9c7hv ) & r/chessbeginners ( post ID q9ctpl ).
Quote :
Why isn’t there an option (not replacement) for correspondence chess to be about move sealing/adjournments instead of just the usual 0 increment + 3 day delay? Would you like an option? I think you could play LIVE games with friends asynchronously this way.
Update: I think I’ll call this ‘asynchronous live.’
—
note 1: I am a 9LX player. 9LX convinced me to try correspondence 9LX/chess: chess960 correspondence?
note 2: this doesn’t replace the regular correspondence. it’s just another option.
—
Question 1: Why isn’t there like this? (Or is there?)
Question 2: Would you like something like this?
i don’t really wanna play correspondence as is because it’s like the winner is whoever puts more time into playing the game (instead of more time into training for the game)…in the following sense:
- correspondence currently is like…0 units of time + 3 day delay + 0 units of time increment. there’s not quite an incentive of moving early. people see the move and get 3 days to think.
- however, i wouldn’t mind getting 3 days to think BEFORE you see the move: you have 3 days to think BEFORE you see the move and then you see the move and play. i believe it’s very different because you would have to prepare for several moves. in ordinary correspondence you ‘postpare’ after seeing only 1 move.
what i’d like is for a different correspondence option have like adjournment/move sealing (like possibly for chessboxing see here or here or here) and like normal time controls eg 10min+3sec (rapid) or 3min+2sec (blitz) like this:
- instead of 3 days as the delay, let it be the deadline to make the move
- white has 3 days to make the 1st move: what does white have to do?
- white has to open the board to see the starting position during the allotted 3 days to see the position at which time white’s time will start running.
- then white will move.
- then the move is sealed and then white’s time stops running. BUT black’s time doesn’t start running. this is different from original correspondence because black doesn’t yet see white’s move!
- black has 3 days to make the 1st move: what does black have to do?
- black is notified that white has made a move.
- black has 3 days to open the board to see the move.
- black is shown the move at which time black’s time will start running.
- then black will move.
- then the move is sealed and then black’s time stops running.
- white has 3 days to make the 2nd move.
- and so on.
- note: 3 days can be either the deadline for just opening the notification to see opponent’s move or for both opening and then submitting your move. technically there is a few minutes-seconds of difference here (eg in a 25min+10 sec, you can/can’t take 2min to make your move if your your deadline is 11:59pm and your clock started at 11:57pm.)
it’s basically like the tournaments with adjournment before the age of computers. now we adjourn after every move.
the similarity with correspondence here is that it’s flexible. you’re basically playing a live game at your own pace.
- Like you want to play blitz against someone who lives in a 12hr timezone away from you. This is I believe how you do it. (Or alternatively you trust each other to really start and stop clocks when you see moves or something…? idk)
like attending lectures in online class:
1 – it can be live or recorded.
- analogue: you get to choose when you want to see your opponent’s move.
2 – but you still have the same deadlines as regular in person class like submit homework after a week.
- analogue: you’re still within the 10+3 or 3+2 deadline.
—
cross-posted:
https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/q9c7hv/why_isnt_there_an_option_not_replacement_for/
And then on 2022Jan29 I cross-posted to r/lichess ( ‘Is the 1st site with such a hybrid of correspondence and live going to be lichess ?’ – post ID sff4o4 )
Part0 – An alternative to correspondence chess :
Correspondence is essentially ‘whoever spends more time on this game wins’. The time control can be described as having 0 minutes + 0 seconds + no increment + X time delay. Eg a 3 day per player correspondence game is 0 minutes + 0 seconds + no increment + 3 days delay.
- Detour : The inaugural correspondence WCC was Australian Cecil John Seddon Purdy aka CJS Purdy, who Bobby Fischer admired. Just like how the inaugural classical WFRCC was Wesley So, who was Bobby’s nephew, a compatriot of Bobby & a former compatriot of Eugene Torre, who was Bobby’s best friend. Also, Levon‘s spouse Arianne Caoili is Filipinx / Filipino / Filipina / Philippine – Australian.
Part1 – Introducing ‘Asynchronous live’ :
An asynchronous live game is a game played online where after every move, a player immediately adjourns. You’re playing a live game but asynchronously, like watching or listening to a recorded lecture in school.
Presumably, the idea of correspondence is to be able to play a game remotely w/ people of not just different locations but different timezones, just as online chess is to be able to play a game remotely w/ people of different locations ( but essentially your same timezone since they’re awake at the same time as you … usually ).
I guess correspondence started out w/ post mail, where you couldn’t do asynchronous live. Now w/ chess websites, there’s no excuse!
Part2 – Example :
Here’s an example of a 3min per player game w/o increment ( & w/o delay lol ) :
- White : White moves like in correspondence. Then, the server seals this move and notifies black.
- 1.1 – Flexible : This might be different for 9LX but I guess for chess1, white’s time needn’t run for the 1st move.
- Black : Like in correspondence, black has a deadline, say, 3 days to make a move. Black goes to the game but doesn’t see white’s move right away. Black sees instead a button that says ‘Reveal move.’ Black clicks the button to reveal white’s move and then black’s time starts running. Black moves and then black’s time stops.
- 2.1 – Again, this move is sealed by the server.
- 2.2 – However, unlike live games but as w/ regular adjournments, white’s time doesn’t start running as soon as black’s time stops. Let’s say black takes 12 seconds to make this move. Black’s remaining time is 2min48sec.
- 2.3 – Flexible : Not that this make a big difference, but black needn’t have 3 days to make a move. Black could have 3 days to reveal the move.
- White : Likewise, white opens account but doesn’t see black’s move right away. White’s time doesn’t start running until ‘Reveal move.’ However, white of course sees the position before black’s move.
- 3.1 – Flexible : Before black’s move is revealed, white may or may not see also black’s remaining time & elapsed time for the move, i.e. white may or may not get information from the move based on the time taken for the move like ‘Oh, black took quite a while or not that long to make this move. Wow 12sec for last move – This gives me information about the move even though I haven’t seen it.’ ( Of course no one really spends 12 seconds on 1st move for either colour on a blitz game, but during the middle game, this could provide some info. )
- Repeat until draw, resign, flag, checkmate, or, as in correspondence, miss the deadline to make ( or see ) the move.
Part3 – Miscellaneous
1 – Ok how is the really different from correspondence since in both cases, players still have 3 days to think?
Now, during the players’ time away from the board, technically the players could think about what moves to make just as in correspondence, but the decision tree is much smaller. In correspondence, players have, say, 3 days to think about what move to make in response to their GIVEN opponent’s move. In asynchronous live, they have 3 days to think about what move to make, UNCONDITIONED on what their opponent’s move is, i.e. they have to think also about what moves to make.
2 – What about cheating?
Actually, I think a pleasant surprise is that there should be far less cheating in asynchronous live than in correspondence.
2.1 – In correspondence, you cheat by seeing move and then asking engine to give the move. I can’t imagine people would really be so pathetic as to cheat in no-money unrated games of correspondence chess or 9LX , but actually I’m not sure how cheating is detected here. My naïve cursory / initial thought is I think it’s kinda the same deal w/ pre-arranged draws where the only way to prove is if it’s really blatant. In a regular live game, cheating is detected based partly on the time spent on certain moves.
2.2 – In asynchronous live:
2.2.1 – If you cheat after seeing the move, then of course this can be detected the same way cheating in regular live games is detected.
2.2.2 – If you cheat before seeing the move, then you’d have to cheat based on several possible opponent’s moves. And actually, I think this can be detected similarly. Maybe not quite the same level but maybe the same level as cheating by seeing only the evaluation of the position, which I believe is very close to seeing an outright engine suggestion.
3 – Alternative names :
2022Jan marklein suggested the name ‘correspondence X’ or ‘X correspondence’ where X is the time control eg ‘correspondence rapid’ if the game is rapid
4 – Someone in go/baduk uses this term ‘asynchronous live’ ! Username is dfan.
In r/baduk there’s a post ‘Do you have a higher correspondence rank or live game rank on OGS?‘ ( post ID 12iscgy ) by mementodory on 2023Apr12 :
Quote :
https://strawpoll.com/polls/jVyG8xmQ6n7
I’m curious. If skill is measured objectively by the quality of moves alone, then correspondence ranks should generally be higher than live game ranks. But if skill is measured relative to the limitations of each time control (i.e. live game 1 dan = correspondence 1 dan), then a difference in your two ranks could mean you have certain strengths/weaknesses that cause the inequality.
I assume the truth is closer to the former rather than the latter, because if it is the latter, we would probably not even need separate ranks. If anyone has any insight on the OGS calculations that would be cool to know as well.
A user named dfan responded as ff :
Transcript :
Rank is determined by your win-loss results, not by the quality of your moves.
I assume that by far the biggest factor in whether you do better in correspondence or live play is not any particular strength or weakness but simply how much time you take in your correspondence games. A lot of people treat correspondence games like asynchronous live games; they check in, look around the board, and play a move that looks good. A lot of other people treat correspondence games like a different animal and spend 10+ minutes on many moves, or keep notes on their plans and variations. That’s easily a 2-stone difference, maybe more.
My notes :
- So yeah correspondence rating is much like puzzle rating if you’re not timed ( cf chesstempo ), it doesn’t really correlate w/ your regular rating.
- But I guess your asynchronous live rating might correlate… But it’ll probably be higher. Idk.
But anyhoo YEAH THERE YOU GO ‘ASYNCHRONOUS LIVE’ – WOW!!! 2.5 YEARS LATER – SOMEONE USES THIS TERM!!!
4.1 – Oh dfan is a chess player :
Uberdude85 posted in r/baduk on 2022Dec22 ‘Cheating accusation amongst top pros?‘ – post ID zs53ig
Quote :
I’ve not been following the Pro scene munch recently, but I don’t think there’s been an AI cheating case at the very top levels yet (Kim Eunji promising young female pro probably the highest profile). Looks like that might be about to change, I spotted this post from Dai Junfu (top Chinese French amateur) on Facebook that appears to be Yang Dingxin 9p implying he thinks Li Xuanho 9p cheated vs him in the quarter finals of the Chunlan Cup on 19th December. Li beat Shin Jinseo today. https://www.facebook.com/861930111/posts/pfbid024RiqtibwHqcVaY4YPi3S6osAXdvhqKKbgbaQzHDa6kkGbjXbeRV8Fd7ncrciNisTl/
A user named JaySayMayday responded re Hans Niemann vs Magnus Carlsen. Lol.
Is this a real accusation? I thought it was a comment made in jest. At the 9p level, players are expected to play on par with most public AI. It would be impossible to decipher whether someone at that level is cheating or not. Furthermore, the rigorous ranking procedure people need to make going from DDK all the way to the highest professional rank possible makes it even more unlikely that someone would risk their entire reputation over one match.
This isn’t a Hans Niemann case where some dude came from nowhere and cheated his way into top level tournaments, especially with a confessed past history of cheating. You’re talking about very well established top ranking players. If there was money on the line, this would be a very safe bet to stake that nobody was cheating.
Response by dfan :
FWIW, Hans Niemann progressed very rapidly but is a very well established top ranking player (currently #35 in the world and maintaining his rating while being checked rigorously) and did not come from nowhere. I think the cases are quite comparable.
a
a
a
a
Shortlink : https://wp.me/p1w4Rr-3ar
Post ID : p1w4Rr-3ar
Mathematiciowned 
Pingback: Chesstempo : Unbelievably unique puzzle rating. / Comparison to deathmatch & training in csgo / cs2 or valorant. | Mathematiciowned
Pingback: Good guys vs Bad guys – Table of Contents | Mathematiciowned