Indeed, the score would be 1:1, as a famous Briton showed us on TV a few months back- even result with GM's, as he could remember the moves played in each game!
Simultaneous Games Paradox
Sort:
cuendillar wrote:
It ought to work to play conditional move in only one of them while taking the full time in the other, trying to bring them "out of phase" with each other. At that point, he simply cannot afford to wait you out as his flag will fall. I do think that aiming for a time win is the simplest response to beat it, strategywise.
Exactly. Theoretically there must be zero time lag between your opponent's move and your response on the other board, which is not the case of course. The big problem is that unlike OTB games, here you fully restore your clock after a move, so if anybody were to practice this determinedly believe me there will be problems for the strong side :) My solution? Abolish simultaneous games...
This would not work. The stronger party can lure you into playing an inferior move he knows how to compensate, but one you cannot. And by the time you know, it is too late.
Kingfisher wrote:
This would not work. The stronger party can lure you into playing an inferior move he knows how to compensate, but one you cannot. And by the time you know, it is too late.
Hehe. I will just do the same weak move and compensate the same way that you do!
Yeah, Kingfisher, you havent really thought that through properly...
To be honest, I wouldn't play two games with the same person at the same time anyway.
Nytik wrote:
Yeah, Kingfisher, you havent really thought that through properly...
To be honest, I wouldn't play two games with the same person at the same time anyway.
So, Nytik, what would you do if a tournament started and it is your move in both games? You can't play one board only...
I that what I would do is say something in the chat window like "what are you doing? Don't be such a loser" and hope his sense of pride would prevent him from, well, being such a loser.
gabrielconroy wrote:
I that what I would do is say something in the chat window like "what are you doing? Don't be such a loser" and hope his sense of pride would prevent him from, well, being such a loser.
Well, generally losers have no sense of pride whatsoever... :)
Actually what is being described here can be reported to the staff and they will step in and handle the situation.
Eiwob wrote:
Cuendillar is right, it's easy to win on time for the stronger part. For excample: Player A (the stronger) makes his move in game 1. One hour later, player B makes the same move in game 2. Then player B has got (if it's 24h per move) 23 hours to make a move in game 1, while player A has got 24 hours to make a move in game 2. All player A needs to do, is to wait 23 hours before he makes his move in game 2, and player B has the choice between making a move and losing on time.
Eiwob, you are right. As mentioned earlier theoretically it is impossible because you can't reduce the time lag between opponent's move and your move to zero. But if one is pretty determined, he can reduce that time lag to seconds and given that this website's clock is not accurate to the second then the strong side is also in danger of losing on time unless he makes a move so I can copy!! :)I think simultaneous games is not a good idea in any aspect.
Eiwob is right however only if one of the stronger players realises what is happening. How many of you check your opponent's ongoing games?
OK, you are right guys. I have to agree that if one sits 3 days without going offline just to catch his opponent's move then he deserves a draw :)
The last thing? Imagine you are playing an opponent that works like a clock. He logs in every evening at the same time...!!
Alright, that was a joke 
It should probably be pointed out that Derren Brown is a sourcerer.
Take the magic out of that statement and you have it. Its all subtle and quite frankly, genious, whether he can read minds or not.
Kingfisher wrote:
This would not work. The stronger party can lure you into playing an inferior move he knows how to compensate, but one you cannot. And by the time you know, it is too late.
And if I notice the bad move ?
Hahahaha... A good one. Your opponent makes a bad move and you recognize it as a blunder and start punishing him until he resigns!!
Things can go wrong too and out of balance.
Dec 22, 2008
0
#19
As some of you maybe have pointed out, Derren Brown have done something like this. Check out this video. Pretty amazing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evZmpsl3jI0
This is much like the story of a guy who entered a chess club and claimed he can draw anybody as blacks simply by mirroring white's moves, yet he was mated in 4 in his first game. I have another thing to claim.
Imagine I am a very low rated player playing vs a very strong player in a tournament and our both games have started simultaneously. There is a big chance that I will lose both games, so what I do I simply wait till he moves as white on game 1 and then I play the same opening as white in game 2! His response as black in game 2 will be my response as black in game1. In other if he plays a strong attack in game 1, he will be *strongly attacked* in game 2. So the score gets 1:1.
Is this a realistic thing? I came across this when yesterday I started a team match with 2 games started simultaneously with 1.e4 on both of them. Luckily for me (!) I chose French while he went for a Spanish. But then again, what do you do when this happens? :)