Mar 19, 2024, 06:18:07 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
News:
Advanced search
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 06:13:33 AM 
Started by evergreenknight - Last post by evergreenknight
I'm sorry for causing you and the other sites trouble. I understand and accept your position.
 
I won't defy your wishes. I want to express with my heart that I was not trying to be malicious, I would start my chess journey by creating an email and a new lichess, chess.com and chesstempo account and everytime , I'd miss a day, some crisis in life, some frustration with chess, something that was less than perfect. I would burn it all and start again and expect that I would be better tomorrow, similar to the ways I'd put off things. It was something I hated and didn't understand about myself my entire life until Elvanse at 23. I have been awfully inconsiderate and careless in my actions, to the harm to the puzzle ratings and extra work to everyone at all the sites by making so many accounts and the effect on other players by playing them directly or through the puzzles. Never even thinking or caring about it.

Thank you for letting me to continue to enjoy your wonderful site and I'll be mindful to never to betray its efforts again with my ignorant selfness.

I did break the TOS of Lichess, probably even more than here as it was my favourite place to play and I'd think to just play before solving. I never heard from, they might not have noticed as they might not have had the resources to deal with as non profit. I did hear from chess.com through they let me keep my current account at the time and closed my previous past accounts.

I'm sorry I let it get so far, a normal person would not make 60+ accounts, it's sad to see the number piled up and realise how much over time.


 2 
 on: Today at 05:34:06 AM 
Started by qoglinda - Last post by richard
From the user guide section on advanced settings:
"Reinforce minimum correct
If we choose a move for training that has earlier context moves in the move list with less than the "Reinforce minimum correct" number of correct attempts in a row, then that move will be tested before testing the target move, even if it is not scheduled yet.

Reinforce minimum days
This is similar to the 'Reinforce minimum correct' setting, in that if a move leading up to the target move is scheduled within 'Reinforce minimum days' number of days then the move will be tested before moving on to the target move. If you’d like the spaced repetition system to force you to play all context moves, then you can set either this number or the reinforce minimum correct number to a very large number which will trigger reinforcement on all leadup items. We don’t recommend this choice, as it will take much longer to learn your repertoire if you are forced to continually play moves you know well, but some users prefer this style of training, and it can be useful in smaller repertoires. Setting both the the values to 0 with disable reinforcement and only context moves that are due or about to be due will be used as training targets."



I think we have supporting premoving already on the todo list.

 3 
 on: Today at 05:28:37 AM 
Started by qoglinda - Last post by qoglinda
is there a way to turn off the autoplay completely so that you can practice every move instead of just one move?

also would be a good idea to add premoving in the practice

 4 
 on: Today at 04:01:07 AM 
Started by evergreenknight - Last post by richard
Sorry, the issue is that you can't 'unsee' previous attempts on previous accounts. While you've not done a massive amount of problems on most accounts, with over 60 accounts created, they add up, totalling nearly 4000 attempts (and those are just the ones we are sure of).

You can continue to use the site on your evergreenknight account, but we'll not be removing you from the ignore list. Being on the ignore list has very little impact on site functionality from the user's point of view, especially if you are not competing for rankings. If we notice more accounts being created (or a return to any of your older accounts) we may start to take measures which prevent access to the site.

Note that lichess also has a non-multiple account policy , although they do allow up to 3 in "special circumstances", but 60+ is a lot more than three, so If you've been doing the same thing there you'll are also be in violation of their terms of service conditions.

 5 
 on: Today at 03:16:08 AM 
Started by evergreenknight - Last post by evergreenknight
This is true, I've had made many many accounts. Like new years resolution, I've taken up and  quickly abandoned many chess accounts each time with the intention of keeping it while creating it. I tend to give up and be more inconsistent in the past.

The accounts were genuine attempts, as can be seen accounts of similar usernames on other sites https://lichess.org/@/TheEvergreenKnight, https://www.chessable.com/profile/TheEvergreenKnight. The same for previous accounts, you'll find equivalent on lichess, allowable usersnames are longer on lichess than on this site which is why there an extra "The".

I was unaware until recently that duplication was any issue, the only one puzzle which I recalled or at least saw something similar in the past was https://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/69034008 which I lost elo on. I limit myself to doing tactics until I lose then I stop for the day so I don't tilt which can similarly seen on lichess account, i had no expectations i would meet any puzzles again, nor impacting any leader boards my elo has been roughly stable since I joined and over 300 elo from touching any leader boards (I do have expectations but they are probably wildly unrealistic.)

I don't wish to game the system so I offer this information willingly, I place failed tactics from all my bullet/blitz games and puzzle rush and relevant here chesstempo tactics into decks for spaced repetition, I prefer anki to chessable/chessbase for openings/tactics and with the benefit of everything non-chess related. A practice I've only been motivated to do for both general studies and chess this month-ish.

Are there any Avenues to get off the ignore list, I've attached some files and if you require any more information or evidence you can put me to question. https://imgur.com/a/fyoub6N

 6 
 on: Today at 01:19:14 AM 
Started by prairiedoc - Last post by richard
Thanks Prairiedoc,

I'm inclined to leave this one enabled unless you disagree (although I guess you could argue choosing the 'whimper' line is argument enough to disable).

Regards,
Richard.

 7 
 on: Mar 18, 2024, 11:38:55 PM 
Started by prairiedoc - Last post by prairiedoc
@leblitzer,
1...Rxd5 2.Nxd5? is a blunder, defeated by the repeated Distraction tactics you demonstrate.

But white can use tactics too. Consider a Distraction tactic 2.f5+ by the white pawn.
( ) vs ( )
Date:
Event:
Site:
Round:
Result:
Now black is only up one pawn. That typically is not good enough to be a ChessTempo solution. The Correct solution is up a rook-for-a-pawn.

An endgame up one pawn, with master level play, is advantageous and can often be won. Stockfish16, at depth30, believes black can force the win in this inferior move order variation, via a precise long endgame, but ChessTempo "typically" does not give ALTs for long endgames (one pawn advantage) if you missed a short-term, material winning tactic.

The Toga eval of 1...Rxd5 2.f5+ is 0.81 depth20. Toga's choice of 6...Kd6 is inaccurate and that likely draws against best defense. The only winning move 6 is trading pieces and winning the one pawn advantage king-pawn endgame because black also has the centrally placed king as a positional resource.

Stockfish, looking deeper into the one pawn advantage endgame, found 6...Bxd4 and gives eval +3 at depth 21 and +4 at depth30. But careful, accurate, sometimes sharp play is needed to convert the win.
( ) vs ( )
Date:
Event:
Site:
Round:
Result:
The above analysis shows how ChessTempo continues to evolve using the "two pawn" threshold. For problems rated above 2200 or so, CT is occasionally disabling problems which experts and masters identify as being "clearly winning" with one pawn advantages supported by dominant positions. This problem is not rated that high. And I would assert that if the computer engine Toga limited to depth20 can blunder the endgame, then that one-pawn endgame is not "clearly winning."

So I do not suggest disabling this problem, even though the dominant error is 1...Rxd5. I also suspect many players who chose 1...Rxd5 miscalculated as @leblitzer did.
Current ratings
Blitz 1699 on 2/5 successes.
Standard 1749 on 8/21 successes.
3 star quality.

The Correct solution is choosing to play the Distraction tactic first. 1...f5+ 2.Kf3 Rxd5, winning a rook. White fights back, the best she can, winning one pawn of compensation with 2.Rxf5 Rxf5.

It appears at the end of the problem that white can regain more compensation by taking the rook. Both Toga at depth19, and Stockfish at depth30, see 3.Nxf5 as a worse idea. It  reduces the material balance to B-for-2P, but white's pawns are far from promotion. The evals are +5 for black, and mate around move 21 when I try some variations. Some of those variations, however, involve both sides promoting a queen and more endgame tactics. So if I am white against club level and expert players, I am taking 3.Nxf5 and making my opponent demonstrate his endgame skills. The "computer best" 3.Kf3 is going out with a wimper. The 3.Kf3 endgame is so easy and robust, a caveman can do it.
( ) vs ( )
Date:
Event:
Site:
Round:
Result:

 8 
 on: Mar 18, 2024, 11:05:57 PM 
Started by evergreenknight - Last post by richard
You'd been using the site across a wide range of accounts, which is a violation of our terms of service conditions. There are several reasons for that rule, but one of the main ones is keeping the tactics rankings fair, and the ratings as meaningful as possible. When you solve across multiple accounts, you avoid duplicate detection and duplicate avoidance measures,
 which impacts rating fairness. Therefore, you've been placed on the ignore list to avoid your attempts impacting problem ratings, which also prevents you from becoming active, and therefore appearing on the high score lists.

 9 
 on: Mar 18, 2024, 02:58:57 PM 
Started by evergreenknight - Last post by evergreenknight
same as title

 10 
 on: Mar 17, 2024, 01:19:05 PM 
Started by monument - Last post by richard
Oops sorry, I thought by 'guess-the-move' page you meant the actual guess the move training page, and you were referring to the list of guess-the-move games available to play. I should have realised you meant the stats page based on context.

That will also be fixed in the next upload.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10