16650 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
This eliminates the "quick voters" aka the people who vote as soon as they see a move they like. Admins could just see that and do something to them that the group allows him/her to do. So then they have to discuss what to vote. Otherwise maybe a bad move would overrun a good move because people who vote on gut instinct would vote for a bad move immediately, and you could lose the game because of it.
Yes but this goes both ways. Either side can have this problem so things are even. There is no problem here.
but then suppose this is not the case. Your opponents could have people who are actually listening and discussing, while you don't. Sure there is the possibility of both sides having this problem, but if both sides are doing it, then what's the point of playing the vote chess? It just seems like vote chess would be more appealing if there were some things changed about it, such as this.
but then suppose this is not the case. Your opponents could have people who are actually listening and discussing, while you don't.
Then I'd say they're the better team and deserve the win, wouldn't you?
however, your side could just easily as easily have the better players, and yet you still lose due to early voters, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it, which is why I propose doing something where you can do something about it.
I think vote chess is all about people voting whatever they want, even if it may not necessarily be the best move.
Agreed -- I can't think of anything that would dissuade me from playing vote chess more than this. If you need to have some degree of control over the group then you should exert it through good leadership by being persuasive in the Vote Chess discussion.
I do, however, support the ablity to set a moratorium on voting at the beginning of each move to address the issue of "hit and run" voters who don't wait for the discussion.
Maybe, don't allow anybody to vote who has not posted in the discussion?
That's also not a bad idea, although it may inadvertently encourage spaming of the vote chess discussion.
maybe just have an option in the vote chess seeks where you have to vote within x time period, between y time and z time.
This is something I would really like, I try to encorage it in nmy group, but it does not always happen.
That doesn't work with teams of players from around the globe.
It's not a problem as long as there's a minimum of 24 hours allotted for the registration of votes.
Judit Polgar would of been able to beat all male champions
by Americu a few minutes ago
Are tactics really the way to go?
by yureesystem 5 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by camberfoil 5 minutes ago
5/29/2015 - Kramnik-Anand WC match 2008
by iolah2 7 minutes ago
How do you deal with a pawn storm?
by Fiveofswords 13 minutes ago
Why is Stockfish making this obviously bad move?
by bb_gum234 17 minutes ago
by ilie123456 20 minutes ago
How do I play when I am behind in pieces?
by Kman413 21 minutes ago
Thoughts on this line?
by chessmicky 22 minutes ago
Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare Me !
by ipcress12 22 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!