pull down to refresh

Stacker News Chess Tournament?!

I've been playing more chess on lichess recently.
Even though I am not very successful, learning and applying chess openings, their goals (piece development, controlling the center etc.) and some common ideas like pinning pieces or forks made chess really fun! I now feel like I actually know what I am doing (or should be doing) instead of just randomly trying to win or hoping for blunders.
This made me think: wouldn't it be cool if we would have a chess tournament on SN? I know that @itsTomekK and @needcreations_ expressed interest in ~chess in the past. Are there more chess players here? View this as the post to gauge interest and ideas. What follows are my probably underdeveloped ideas.

First phase: Correspondence games

My current idea is that we have two phases. In the first phase, everyone plays correspondence games against everyone else. A correspondence game is a game where you have a long time to make your moves, so no need to schedule a specific block of time with your opponent. We could set a time limit of 1 day per turn to not draw out the games for too long:
According to this site, the average number of moves per chess game is 79, so this would mean that once a correspondence game started, on average, it should be finished after 79 days.
The analysis revealed that, on average, a chess game lasts for 79 half moves. For clarity, a half move in chess refers to a single turn by either White or Black.
This is still quite long but I think this is okay. To get this tournament done in a timely fashion, we would need to play these correspondence games simultaneously; so everyone would need to make a turn per game every day to not lose by timeout.
The results of these games are recorded on SN. A win is +1, a draw is +0 and a loss is -1. The players with the best scores then continue to the next phase. How many players move to the next phase depends on how many players there even are. If we only have 8 players, then it makes sense that only the top 2 or 4 move to the next phase. The correspondence phase is basically just a way to eliminate most players at once.
We could also do a group phase with fixtures if we don't want to play too many games at once. We could also not do correspondence games but commit more time and play time limit games as explained next.

Second phase: Finals

This phase is a single elimination tournament with brackets. The games now have time limits per side so players need to schedule a specific block of time. So for example, we could do games that give each player 30 minutes so games are one hour max.

The Price

Hopefully obviously, there should be something at stake. It's all fun and games as long as someone loses a bunch of money. So we could do simply buy-ins of 10k sats or something. Winner takes all?
I am going to wait until this post is 72 hours old. This gives me three days to draw attention to this in the @saloon. Then I will make a new post to announce the next steps, check how many potential participants we have so far and what the buy-in should be.
I am also considering to let delphi.market, my prediction market that does not exist yet sponsor the prize of the first season. Something between 25k and 100k sats sounds reasonable.
In my wildest fantasies, we're watching chess games unfold live and bet who's going to win on delphi.market. 👀
reply
Interested to join. I'm a reasonably strong chess player, but still well blow master level (this is my lichess profile).
Though I personally don't like correspondence games, mostly because it's too easy to cheat there (using an engine). Would be happy to play any real-time (e.g. blitz or rapid) time control.
reply
I'm a reasonably strong chess player, but still well blow master level (this is my lichess profile).
Nice profile. You made me reconsider "winner takes all" and/or maybe the buy-in should be smaller, lol.
Though I personally don't like correspondence games, mostly because it's too easy to cheat there (using an engine). Would be happy to play any real-time (e.g. blitz or rapid) time control.
Oh, great point! @kristapsk also expressed preference for real-time games. I would also actually like real-time games more.
Btw, did this post make you sign up for SN to reply? If so, cool and welcome!
I am interested.
reply
This is a cool idea. I was thinking about putting together a SN poker game at some point.
Looking forward to seeing how this chess tournament goes.
I know how to play chess but I am a not good. I don’t mind embarrassing myself though so count me in.
reply
We can have a special price pool for most embarrassing play
reply
Now we are talking.
reply
Ok here’s my thought - I can almost say with certainty that the points will be distributed based on rating. Like, if there’s one person here over 2200, they will likely be undefeated… it’s hard to do a tournament when everyone is rated differently, so it won’t be much of a true competition in that sense.
That being said, I’d still be excited to play people here and participate just for the fun of it!
reply
Mhh, that's a very good point. Maybe no sponsored prize pool then (only buy-ins?); at least distribute across top 3 or something or really just for fun with no sats involved.
reply
Yeah I'll think through the prize pool thing... money for chess games with anonymous players online is a massive incentive for cheating, and I don't have any great solutions for that off the top of my head...
reply
I'm in!
How about a warm-up one evening tournament of short (5-15 min) games? On lichess you can customize the tournament
reply
That sounds like a good idea!
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @SatsMate 22 Jun
Love this idea. For me, I'm not a big chess guy but would definitely watch if its on zap.stream.
IF we could do texas hold em poker tournaments for sats that would be my cup of tea :)
reply
@grayruby expressed interest in holding a poker tournament here.
Maybe we can do a poker tournament next! It would be cool if tournaments like this could become a regular event on SN. I'd be willing to organize them. But let's focus on this tournament first. :)
reply
Would love to! Chess is my second favourite strategy game after Go. Count on me! :)
reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @felipe 22 Jun
This would be fun! Not sure about having a prize, though. It would attract cheaters
reply
@02d43d3798 mentioned that correspondence games make it easier to cheat so we will not do correspondence game.
I think having a prize and (small) buy-ins would still be cool. Makes this more serious. I also think a prize attracts more. But it shouldn't be too high since it does indeed give incentives to cheat, you're right.
I think I am going to sponsor a prize between 25k and 100k sats.
reply
Interested, I'm not the best chess player, but I can play solid games, I'm a bit untrained, if this happens in the end, I'll have to train a little.
reply
Chess is my favorite game. Correspondence games aren't good with modern computer analysis. Second problem - different ELO (chess experience). However you can create there (on lichess) custom tournaments, post here link and everyone can take part there.
It'd be great if we have chess club on stackerNews
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taft 22 Jun
That’s a great idea! I have been playing chess for years on https://www.chess.com/ (rarely on lichess).
So, I would like to see a chess tournament here on SN.
reply
I don’t have time at the present that read through this whole thing yet - will do later and provide feedback if I feel so inclined.
Either way, count me in!
reply
Are there more chess players here?
Yes
everyone plays correspondence games against everyone else. A correspondence game is a game where you have a long time to make your moves, so no need to schedule a specific block of time with your opponent. We could set a time limit of 1 day per turn to not draw out the games for too long
I would prefer 15+10 rapid or something like that. People could be given some x days of time to arrange time suitable for both to play the match.
A win is +1, a draw is +0 and a loss is -1
Normally in chess tournaments win is +1, draw is +1/2, loss is 0.
reply
Yes
👀🥳
I would prefer 15+10 rapid or something like that. People could be given some x days of time to arrange time suitable for both to play the match.
I like this! For some reason, I thought it would be too much commitment to arrange times for such matches but I actually don't know why I thought so. I would prefer this because it means we're going to have a winner faster and can iterate sooner on the system.
Would you prefer everyone playing against each other in this first phase or brackets?1
Normally in chess tournaments win is +1, draw is +1/2, loss is 0.
Oh, I didn't know that. We can also do that then :)

Footnotes

  1. Btw, you finally made me look up what the +10 means, lol. This is how much of a chess noob I am. ↩
Interested!
reply