Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 18:36:39 08/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 08, 2002 at 10:28:08, Matthew Hull wrote: Comon get real. i logon daily there and i'm the only titled player there. If i want a blitz game (5 0) against another human > 2000 rating there i get 'declined'. No reason given but it's because they fear me seeing my title, which is only FM by the way. The only way to play for me against someone with a higher rating there is by playing computers. Not a fun option of course as they have the same rating deflation there. The K=32 at icc is obviously wrong, but any 2200+ dude at FICS also can't play chess like a titled player. Also at ICC it's hard to get a game against someone rated higher. In fact 99% of all games i play i just click 'accept' (i get plenty of challenges at icc) and play someone a load of points lower rated. We all know in blitz that it's easier to achieve 50% than > 50%. There are exceptions of course, but this is a known rule. Blitz online doesn't compare to OTB games simply. Some games i lose because i'm chatting in another window. So 50% is always easier to score then! In short playing against higher rated is winning points simply. Not sure it works for computers like that, but in human-human games it sure does! FICS offers nothing there, because if i play someone under my rating there, then i play against someone who hasn't got a clue from the word 'plan'. Of course always a premover, though i hate premoving (ever seen OTB a premover?) as i see online play as a way to keep some tactical strength and practice in that way for the real thing (OTB). In short it's very sad what happens at FICS. Then i logon at icc and someone says 'hi' to me. I challenge the kid (GM or IM usually) and he appears to be > 3000 rated or something there and says: "decline", with as default reason: "i lose points playing lower rated, but i don't mind playing you at 1 0". then it's 'woef' 'woef' and i forfeit the few good positions i have in 1 0 :) >On August 08, 2002 at 09:53:22, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On August 08, 2002 at 09:12:29, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>>2) Registering on FICS was not very fast, but straightforward. Unfortunately >>>>people seem to have lost interest in it. >>> >>>FICS is horrible. It took me 6 months to get my account, and then they nuked it >>>when I didn't play a game in over 8 months. HOWEVER, I had logged in several >>>times in those 8 months, could just never get a game! They told me I had to >>>apply for another (C) account before they can give me another. >> >>I don't recognize these problems with FICS. >>Always lot's of people willing to help in channel 1 and people don't mind >>playing computers. >>I was online for 13 hours yesterday and got 43 games against 23 different human >>opponents. I think only 4 of those were unrated against a guest. >> >>I had a great time, and will be right back after a few more enhancements... :) >> >>Frankly I see no reason to pay for playing on ICC, when FICS is so great and >>totally for free! >> >>-S. > > >I agree. From what I've seen on FICS, if a computer account posts seeks, it >gets played plenty by both computers and folks. > >Also, any chess server has to offer freedom of options, just like you would get >at a regular walk-in chess club. People choose the opponents they like to play. > Even if their motives in choosing seem "corrupt", you still must offer that >freedom. > >As for ratings, FICS has modified their rating formulas to make abuse less >attractive. Established ratings will not change as much if you've played many >games. Besides, who cares? If some chump has an inflated rating, it doesn't >mean he can beat you. If he's cheating, what does it matter? Just count it as >a computer. (Crafty has a feature that allows you to specify known computer >accounts as well as GMs, IMs, and "blockers".) > >If computer accounts only want to play people, that's fine and good, especially >for programmers who want to improve their performance angainst strong humans. > >Lot's of people have modified (weakened) free chess programs running, purely for >the fun of having an opponents out there that weaker players have a chance >against and to gauge their progress against. I thinks that's great. > >The only drawback that I can see on FICS is the relative lack of strong human >players. Not that I could play them, but it's fun and interesting to watch them >play. I'm sure that more of the top programmers would have active accounts >there if it was frequented more by top humans. That has to be the main >advantage of ICC. > >Regards, >Matt
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.