This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Handicap (chess) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | Handicap (chess) was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 3, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork ( talk · contribs) 19:16, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ✔Tea time
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Closed as not listed. SilkTork' ✔Tea time 12:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Just wondering ...
In capped pawn or ringed piece odds, did the designated chessman have to deliver the mating check directly, or was a discovered check uncovered by the move of the designated chessman sufficient? The legality of this alternative should make the odds slightly less overepowering, though notr much, I'd suspect. Also, it would permit a ringed king who could only deliver mate via discovery. WHPratt ( talk) 14:27, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Have castling rights (odd-giver forfeits right to castle to either side) ever bee a significant part of odds? It may seem a good thing in practice mode or coaching mode or to teach advantage and disadvantages of castling. Thieh ( talk) 18:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
This kind of thing is discussed in Kaufman's Chess Board Options. I'll see if I can work it in. Double sharp ( talk) 05:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Nakamura played a series of games against a handicaped (one pawn less) Stockfish, but arguably with his own handicap of being human and playing for 10 hours straight, even though with the aid/compensation of an older version of Rybka, ~200 ELO points inferior to Stockfish. " Stockfish beats Nakamura". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.99.178.197 ( talk) 04:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I doubt pawn-and-move is a lost position for Black objectively. One can certainly hang on a pawn down and escape with a draw. Besides, though Black's king is exposed (the f-pawn is missing), (s)he can make a virtue out of this by quickly castling kingside and using the king's rook on the already half-open f-file. I would expect that with perfect play, Black could salvage a draw out of pawn-and-move.
Knight odds I am basically certain is lost for Black objectively, and I think pawn-and-two-moves may be so if White begins 1.e4 2.d4○, grabbing tons of space, central control, and preparing for lots of development. But this complaint doesn't really work for pawn-and-move, I think. Double sharp ( talk) 16:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps a better reason to be against odds is the fact that they let you simply try to force as many exchanges as possible, until the stronger side has no pieces left. Double sharp ( talk) 16:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Has anyone managed to suggest some kind of odds-giving that would effectively neutralize the advantage of White having the first move, more-or-less exactly? It seems to me that such a concept could be very popular. Not that it would replace the conventional game, but might be employed for the occasional tiebreak. I know that they now use something with varying times on the clock, but I'm talking about something positional and very subtle. Say that Black begins with both rook pawns on the third rank, or say that White cannot play a Pawn double-step on the first move (only). Now, even those ideas are probably insufficient or too extreme, but, use your imagination! WHPratt ( talk) 19:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Stockfish 14.1 says: Two moves 1.e4 2.d4 (and then Black to move) is +0.94, which looks pretty grim. But Kaufman in Chess Board Options says it's really about +0.6 and not won yet, backing the latter statement up with empirical results. Pawn and move (f7) is +2.82, so I was completely wrong. And pawn (f2) is −1.56. Double sharp ( talk) 09:55, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Handicap (chess). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Articles/evaluation_of_material_imbalance.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:38, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Not explicitly stated by Kaufman (whose assessment of this handicap I added to the article), but using the brain prosthesis widely known as Stockfish 11 to supplement my poor skills: 1.e3 2.Bd3 3.Qg4 4.Nc3 is the problem with pawn and four moves handicap. Now White threatens mate in 2 by 5.Qg6+, and there are not many moves that defend against that:
If the stronger player remove one of his pawn, but the removed pawn is the a-pawn, or the b-pawn, or the c-pawn, …, what will be the result? 211.23.210.36 ( talk) 21:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Stockfish 14.1 says:
Double sharp ( talk) 11:11, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
And:
Double sharp ( talk) 11:13, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not putting this anecdote on this article's front page because I don't have a source.
Alekhine, in his latter days, shabbily clad, was studying some chess game on a portable set while waiting for his train somewhere in Spain or Portugal. Another passenger arrives:
“Oh, you're a chess player; could we play together?
— Certainly”, says Alekhine, and he sets up the initial position without the Qd1.
“B-b-but, you don't know me, and you're giving me queen odds?
— If I couldn't”, says Alekhine, “I would know you.”
Tonymec ( talk) 17:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
In case anyone wondered: knight, pawn, and move (f7) is about the same as rook odds, per a forum post by Kaufman. Double sharp ( talk) 04:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Handicap (chess) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | Handicap (chess) was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 3, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork ( talk · contribs) 19:16, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ✔Tea time
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Closed as not listed. SilkTork' ✔Tea time 12:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Just wondering ...
In capped pawn or ringed piece odds, did the designated chessman have to deliver the mating check directly, or was a discovered check uncovered by the move of the designated chessman sufficient? The legality of this alternative should make the odds slightly less overepowering, though notr much, I'd suspect. Also, it would permit a ringed king who could only deliver mate via discovery. WHPratt ( talk) 14:27, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Have castling rights (odd-giver forfeits right to castle to either side) ever bee a significant part of odds? It may seem a good thing in practice mode or coaching mode or to teach advantage and disadvantages of castling. Thieh ( talk) 18:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
This kind of thing is discussed in Kaufman's Chess Board Options. I'll see if I can work it in. Double sharp ( talk) 05:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Nakamura played a series of games against a handicaped (one pawn less) Stockfish, but arguably with his own handicap of being human and playing for 10 hours straight, even though with the aid/compensation of an older version of Rybka, ~200 ELO points inferior to Stockfish. " Stockfish beats Nakamura". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.99.178.197 ( talk) 04:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I doubt pawn-and-move is a lost position for Black objectively. One can certainly hang on a pawn down and escape with a draw. Besides, though Black's king is exposed (the f-pawn is missing), (s)he can make a virtue out of this by quickly castling kingside and using the king's rook on the already half-open f-file. I would expect that with perfect play, Black could salvage a draw out of pawn-and-move.
Knight odds I am basically certain is lost for Black objectively, and I think pawn-and-two-moves may be so if White begins 1.e4 2.d4○, grabbing tons of space, central control, and preparing for lots of development. But this complaint doesn't really work for pawn-and-move, I think. Double sharp ( talk) 16:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps a better reason to be against odds is the fact that they let you simply try to force as many exchanges as possible, until the stronger side has no pieces left. Double sharp ( talk) 16:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Has anyone managed to suggest some kind of odds-giving that would effectively neutralize the advantage of White having the first move, more-or-less exactly? It seems to me that such a concept could be very popular. Not that it would replace the conventional game, but might be employed for the occasional tiebreak. I know that they now use something with varying times on the clock, but I'm talking about something positional and very subtle. Say that Black begins with both rook pawns on the third rank, or say that White cannot play a Pawn double-step on the first move (only). Now, even those ideas are probably insufficient or too extreme, but, use your imagination! WHPratt ( talk) 19:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Stockfish 14.1 says: Two moves 1.e4 2.d4 (and then Black to move) is +0.94, which looks pretty grim. But Kaufman in Chess Board Options says it's really about +0.6 and not won yet, backing the latter statement up with empirical results. Pawn and move (f7) is +2.82, so I was completely wrong. And pawn (f2) is −1.56. Double sharp ( talk) 09:55, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Handicap (chess). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Articles/evaluation_of_material_imbalance.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:38, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Not explicitly stated by Kaufman (whose assessment of this handicap I added to the article), but using the brain prosthesis widely known as Stockfish 11 to supplement my poor skills: 1.e3 2.Bd3 3.Qg4 4.Nc3 is the problem with pawn and four moves handicap. Now White threatens mate in 2 by 5.Qg6+, and there are not many moves that defend against that:
If the stronger player remove one of his pawn, but the removed pawn is the a-pawn, or the b-pawn, or the c-pawn, …, what will be the result? 211.23.210.36 ( talk) 21:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Stockfish 14.1 says:
Double sharp ( talk) 11:11, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
And:
Double sharp ( talk) 11:13, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not putting this anecdote on this article's front page because I don't have a source.
Alekhine, in his latter days, shabbily clad, was studying some chess game on a portable set while waiting for his train somewhere in Spain or Portugal. Another passenger arrives:
“Oh, you're a chess player; could we play together?
— Certainly”, says Alekhine, and he sets up the initial position without the Qd1.
“B-b-but, you don't know me, and you're giving me queen odds?
— If I couldn't”, says Alekhine, “I would know you.”
Tonymec ( talk) 17:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
In case anyone wondered: knight, pawn, and move (f7) is about the same as rook odds, per a forum post by Kaufman. Double sharp ( talk) 04:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)