Photos from Beijing

Upload and share images and games amongst fellow checker players.

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby william on Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:39 pm

sune

As my first love since the age of 5 is checkers ; i would love to be able to agree with you . However the fact is that the person who can truly truly understand both games ( and unfortunately most checker players don't even understand an 8th of their own game) must objectively realise that 10x10 is not just a game of ''shooting down the other , and that the most complexe endings lie here

I am sorry ; but I feel qualified to be able to say that I know enough about both games , and this is a fact , both endgames are rich ... but 10x10 is richer
User avatar
william
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:27 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby MostFamousDane on Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:49 pm

william wrote:sune

As my first love since the age of 5 is checkers ; i would love to be able to agree with you . However the fact is that the person who can truly truly understand both games ( and unfortunately most checker players don't even understand an 8th of their own game) must objectively realise that 10x10 is not just a game of ''shooting down the other , and that the most complexe endings lie here

I am sorry ; but I feel qualified to be able to say that I know enough about both games , and this is a fact , both endgames are rich ... but 10x10 is richer


Hi William

Argumentation by authority doesn't really work very well with me :). You can convince me that 10x10 endgames richer by posting an International draughts 2x2 ending that is more complex than an early 1st position. I think you need at lot of pieces to create an interesting ending - but you can prove me wrong. The example you posted was extremely simple :)
Sune
User avatar
MostFamousDane
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Brondby, Denmark

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby william on Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:32 pm

Ok Sune

But we come back to the same problem , you say "" show me a 10x10 which is more complexe "" , I then reply " who decides which is more complexe? "

And so we get nowhere...

I will post some " complexe " 10x10 problems that you will not be able to solve , perhaps because you have never seen the idea before , just as in first position for example for a 10x10 player , or perhaps just because it really is complexe.

I am no authority leader as you say , and have never claimed to be , but when a toolmaker tells me to hold the hammer this way and not that , because thats the way he has found best over 30 years of work experience , then I normally listen to him , less I hit my thumb...

''complexe '' problems follow
User avatar
william
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:27 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Lisle Cormier on Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:33 pm

I played some big board on playok and did not offer my opponents much competition, especially under time constraint. It seems to me that the size of the board demands more memorization than straight checkers, but the concepts are not more complicated.

I have some experience with flying kings through pool checkers and its sister Brazilian draughts. I have studied endings in Kaplan's "The Art of American Pool Checkers" (a fantasticly well organized learning experience!) and found the backwards-jumping men and flying kings to be interesting and complex in their own way. To me, the endings in this variant - like checkers - are still the "meat" of the game.

Before studying this book, it was difficult to make opponents pay for positional mistakes. Often, a jump backwards filled a gaping hole in the center, for example. Thus what seemed like a tactical error according to straight checkers intuition was not always so. Also, material advantage was not always enough to win. But on the flipside, sacrifices that allow a king deserved close attention.

Bowen's Twins and the like are subtly gorgeous. I have not studied pool checkers deeply enough to find their equivalent, but I believe they exist to be appreciated by master-level players in this variant. Equivalently, I don't remember playing anyone outside of the master class in straight checkers that could handle Bowen's Twins crossboard.
Lisle Cormier
User avatar
Lisle Cormier
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:23 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:35 pm

MostFamousDane wrote:You can convince me that 10x10 endgames richer by posting an International draughts 2x2 ending that is more complex than an early 1st position. I think you need at lot of pieces to create an interesting ending - but you can prove me wrong. The example you posted was extremely simple :)


Here is just one position from book "Mini endings" (no more than 2 white pieces). There are about 50 or 60 positions from this category, which has more than one variation. But remember one importnat thing - in 10x10 Kings are flying, and it takes 7 moves in Anglo-American Checkers to move from one corner to opposite, and only 1 move in 10x10 !

So - the argument "longest" shall not be counted :D We only consider number of maneurs, variations and ideas.

Image
016] J.H.de Hoogh [ A ] , "Het Eindspel" , 1941. (1924)
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby MostFamousDane on Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:57 pm

Alex_Moiseyev wrote:
MostFamousDane wrote:You can convince me that 10x10 endgames richer by posting an International draughts 2x2 ending that is more complex than an early 1st position. I think you need at lot of pieces to create an interesting ending - but you can prove me wrong. The example you posted was extremely simple :)


Here is just one position from book "Mini endings" (no more than 2 white pieces). There are about 50 or 60 positions from this category, which has more than one variation. But remember one importnat thing - in 10x10 Kings are flying, and it takes 7 moves in Anglo-American Checkers to move from one corner to opposite, and only 1 move in 10x10 !

So - the argument "longest" shall not be counted :D We only consider number of maneurs, variations and ideas.


Ok if the "longest" argument shall not be counted then the number of maneuvers, variations and ideas shall not counted either because that is "just" because the board is larger and there are more pieces :). It exactly BECAUSE it takes 7 moves in checkers to move from one corner to the opposite that checkers end games are more complex (when compared with the same piece count). This is directly related related to the (in my opinion) higher decision complexity of checkers vs International Draughts while International Draughts has higher space complexity (but only when more pieces are placed on the board than in checkers). I still haven't heard a single coherent argument why this isn't the case. It just is a lot harder to visualize 7 moves than 1 long move

Sune's Proverb number 1: "Understanding beats experience every time" :)

What about midget problems it contains well over 100 problems with only 2 pieces per player!
Sune
User avatar
MostFamousDane
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Brondby, Denmark

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:01 pm

william wrote:''complexe '' problems follow


William, in order to save your time, I would recommend you go there (see link below) and take something from here. In total - there are 1000 positions in "Mini-endings" book, with no more than 2 white pieces, but Sune requirements are very limited by 1st position only (!!!), so - take something with 2,3 or 4 pieces.

http://minietiud.forum2x2.ru/forum-f16/tema-t150-45.htm

Perhaps 1st position is the best and only one position which Anglo-American Checkers can produce :D This is sooooo miserable - I am laughing.

Cheap, trash conversation ...

MostFamousDane wrote:What about midget problems it contains well over 100 problems with only 2 pieces per player!
Most of them have only one and not "clear" variation. In 10x10 this is not considered as "composition" at all.
Last edited by Alex_Moiseyev on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby MostFamousDane on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:02 pm

william wrote:Ok Sune

But we come back to the same problem , you say "" show me a 10x10 which is more complexe "" , I then reply " who decides which is more complexe? "

And so we get nowhere...

I will post some " complexe " 10x10 problems that you will not be able to solve , perhaps because you have never seen the idea before , just as in first position for example for a 10x10 player , or perhaps just because it really is complexe.

I am no authority leader as you say , and have never claimed to be , but when a toolmaker tells me to hold the hammer this way and not that , because thats the way he has found best over 30 years of work experience , then I normally listen to him , less I hit my thumb...

''complexe '' problems follow


That is very simple if you cannot produce International Draughts problems with e.g. above 100 moves 2x2 - 200 moves 3x3 etc - then I decide that at least in one objective measurable way the the checkers problems are more complex :)
Sune
User avatar
MostFamousDane
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Brondby, Denmark

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby william on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:36 pm

Sune says
It exactly BECAUSE it takes 7 moves in checkers to move from one corner to the opposite that checkers end games are more complex (when compared with the same piece count). This is directly related related to the (in my opinion) higher decision complexity of checkers vs International Draughts while International Draughts has higher space complexity (but only when more pieces are placed on the board than in checkers).


I have a question , can one single king in checkers "waste " a move or two so as to get the upperhand on enemy troops?
Two yes ... one , NO.

In 10x10 many beautiful themes are executed using exactly this idea ( and in 10x10 one king can do it on his own ) , this I suppose makes a lot harder the art of visualising WHICH king should waste a move ; WHEN and HOW , this is complexity , and art of game :shock:
User avatar
william
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:27 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:46 pm

In conclusion I should say - Sune is absolutely right ! Due to bigger board International checkers have much more complex play, more maneures and more tricks, more ideas.

In other hands, due to rule that pieces and King can move only onto one square, Anglo-American checkers have longer boring play and certainly 10x10 can't beat this.

We can't say Draughts are "richer", indeed, but we can say "longer". Finally we find a true.

Regards,

Alex
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby william on Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:51 pm

THE END ...
User avatar
william
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:27 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Hugh Devlin on Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:40 pm

I have to admit that I find this discussion amusing, and even pathetic. Pathetic in that the people who are voicing their displeasure at the equipment used in Beijing have not actually seen the equipment they talk about, nor are they party to the facts surrounding the use of this equipment.
For the second time in six years the WCDF allowed the use of wooden boards and pieces in a Qualifying tournament. Contrary to what some misinformed people believe, there is nothing in the rules of the game, nor the WCDF Byelaws, that prohibit the use of this equipment. In fact all other variations of the game (i.e the majority of those who play draughts across the globe) use these wooden sets as standard in all major events including World Championship matches, as Alex notes. Because someone disagrees with this does not place them in any position of authorrity - they are clearly in a minority.

The WCDF agreed to use this equipment three months prior to the Beijing event, so as to standardize the equipment used in all the different variations of the game being showcased there. Any suggestion that there was a shortage of equipment and these had to be used as a consequence is complete nonsense. The boards and pieces (with contrasting colours) were especially made by the Chinese authorities for this event, and finished to the highest standard of craftsmanship. Any suggestion that sub-standard equipment was used is nonsense. Any suggestion that this was Black and White pieces on Black and White boards is also nonsense. In fact many of the participants made enquiries as to whether they could purchase these beautiful boards and pieces after the event concluded.

The decision made at the WCDF assembly meeting, to purchase green & white boards and Red and White pieces, had nothing to do with the standard of equipments being used in Beijing. As I’ve said before, this was not the first time that such equipment was used. It was as a result of a principle agreed that all QT’s should use the same equipment, and that the WCDF should have its own supply of equipment, irrespective of where the QT was held. That’s a different matter entirely.


If someone wants to talk of sub-standard equipment being used in major events, there are recent examples available that have nothing to do with the WCDF. However, I note the same critics’ silence in these cases and wonder why? Hugh
Hugh Devlin
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby liam stephens on Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:08 pm

Thank you Hugh for your viewpoint. When the President speaks I sit up and take note.

Obviously, I did not see the actual equipment used in Beijing. However, on several occasions at MSO tournaments, I have seen the boards and pieces used in the 10 x 10 competitions. It has always been a mystery to me that the FMJD authorities, so professional in most respects, use such lack lustre equipment.
Wooden they are and wooden they remain.

If it is a case that we need to “keep up with the Joneses”, then the relevant AGM’s of the associations concerned, should be mandated to change regulation colours accordingly.
In the final analysis “you pays your money and you makes your choice”.
liam stephens
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:56 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:38 am

Michael Shabshai posted on Russian checkers forum those two photos (see below) and said that I won in Beijing because I worked hard even playing with nice young lady. Do you agree with him ?

Image

Image
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: Photos from Beijing

Postby john reade on Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:22 pm

Lovely board!
john reade
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Checker Sharing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron
class=