Forum

Everything that can be said on this topic has been said. So I'm just going to start a list of examples of games where solo-for-all fails the 3-player stage because a player throws the game. Feel free to add games.https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27718580

With 3 seconds left on the clock, do you play e4##, or Rg5# mating yellow, stalemating blue, and losing the game? https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27757786/282/1

Hey Everyone, Thank you all once again for participating and watching the World 4 Player Chess Championships (W4PCC)! Chess.com will be hosting the third Solo W4PCC commencing Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 16:00 UTC. I will post a new forum 2022 Online World 4 Player Chess FFA/Solo Championship (INFORMATION) in exactly a week from now. The purpose of this discussion is to gather feedback from the community before officially announcing it. The previous format will be adopted except unrated with Anonymous, 1pt Queen, 3|7, and FFA with a total of 16 people that qualify for the W4PCC unless the Director and Admins decide otherwise.For previous format:Announcing the 2021 (Third) Online World 4 Player Chess SOLO Championship! (DISCUSSION) - Chess Forums - Chess.comBelow, there will be some posts on options for this format, the results of which will be taken into consideration when finalizing our decision.Starting Position | StrawPoll.comTime Control | StrawPoll.comRated or Unrated? | StrawPoll.comRating Floor | StrawPoll.comFormat for Qualifying | StrawPoll.com

I have a question as I just started playing 4PC recently. What is the Old standard?

I consider myself high rated. I think a lot of people on forum, whether they're ranging from the 2000s to the 2500s or even the 3000+ area will label themself as such. There are some players, who "play for fun"; this is a very broad spectrum. But I will be focusing on one part of it, that specifically stands out to me. When I see 3 players ganging up on me in a game and losing at the cost of their own rating, dignity, and public image, it's very insulting to see them use the excuse "we play for fun", and "rating doesn't matter". I also play for fun. I don't think any single player on 4PC plays for money unless they are a streamer. I have fun when I gain rating or when I am at least able to have a balanced match, and get to lose because of my own mistakes, and grow from them. Not when I am tanked 50 points in a single game because of a beat em up that can't be punished because it wasn't prearranged. It's the problem of looking from both sides; one side probably wants to ruin another person's day, the other wants to win and play fairly. People, if you want to troll others, go on a shooter game, and target one person for the entire match. Don't intentionally ruin another human being’s day for your own pleasure.

Please observe this game: https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27661510/186/1. In my opinion, Blue played well this game and found some key moves. For example, consider this position: What would you play as Blue and why? I think there is only one "best" move. Blue find Rxl6! if Yellow cooperates, then either Green loses the exchange while creating a vulnerable knight or his pawn structure becomes destroyed. In fact, Yellow does find this idea. This signals to Blue that Yellow is at least aware of tactics and position to some degree. Now, consider the following position in this game. What would you play as Green and why? Again, I think there is only one best move. Furthermore, I think there is a best continuation for Blue. Green has Qd12+, which then allows Blue to take Yellow's 9-point queen. Blue doesn't play the hasty Ne6, which only trades a knight for a 1-point queen, but rather finds the best continuation. Although Yellow's position has been greatly weakened, he still has fighting chances in the three-player stage. Can you guess what Yellow plays next? He resigns, which more or less hands the win to Green. Maybe Blue could have given up the knight to take the 1-point queen because he didn't want Yellow to resign in this foolish way. But that would result in less beautiful and sharp play. Blue played accurately and provided entertainment for his audience by finding the sharp move. And in return, Yellow (perhaps out of spite or the unwillingness to accept his reality) simply resigned. In other words, the current rating system allows weakness to have power over strength because Yellow gets to decide in this position if he wants to take Blue down with him by giving up. This is not an isolated example, but one example of MANY games. Too many players are simply too weak to allow the current rating system to be effective because they do not appreciate the beautiful complexity of the three player stage but simply opt to make easy decisions like Yellow did this game.

🧐 Suggestion Book 📒📚 ❓ https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/suggestion-book-2 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Top Player ⚔️ Performance Top 100, of the Best Players in the World 🛡️ | @martinaxo | 16-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/performance-top-100-of-the-best-players-in-the-world ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Change Setup 1.- All Setups | @At_d0sA_fNLt_Laris | 28/04/2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/all-setups 2.- My Thoughs to all the discussions about Setup and Rating - @Empty_K3 | 28-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/my-thoughs-to-all-the-discussions-about-setup-and-rating-empty-k33.- ⚔️It's not Old Standard | it's not Omatamix🛡️ Poll: @martinaxo | 22-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/its-not-old-standard-its-not-omatamix 4.- Brsti Setup: 1.h3 c7 h12 Analysis | @LazyImp | 29-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/brsti-setup-1-h3-c7-h12-analysis 5.- A radical proposal / about the set-up | @Indipendenza | 27-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-radical-proposal-about-the-set-up 6.-Bsrti-invert might be the best setup | @empty_K3 | 25-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/bsrti-invert-might-be-the-best-setup 7.-Omatamix is boring? - I don't think so! | @empty_K3 | 02-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/omatamix-is-boring-i-dont-think-so 8.-What was wrong with Old Standard? | @daveborn | 02-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/what-was-wrong-with-old-standard9.-One Change Might Be All We Need - And It's Probably The Hardest One | 21-06-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/one-change-might-be-all-we-need-and-its-probably-the-hardest-one▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Rating System 1.-Why is SFA Standard Now? @LosChessquire | 26-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/why-is-sfa-standard-now2.-🧐 Where are the players❓ ⚔️ Ranking System 🛡️Poll: @martinaxo | 26-04-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/where-are-the-players-ranking-system 3.-Return FFA to old scoring system of 2 winners @JustinD7 | 19-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/return-ffa-to-old-scoring-system-of-2-winners 4.-FFA rating calculation | @bnjboyd | more than 1 monthhttps://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/ffa-rating-calculation-1 5.- How the Rating System Works | @grable | 08-04-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/how-the-rating-system-works-3 6.-Why the FFA rating system should change | @liquid-sun | 14-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/why-the-ffa-rating-system-should-change7.-A clear example of why the FFA rating system should changehttps://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-clear-example-of-why-the-ffa-rating-system-should-change ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬Server 1.- Games Played / Disconnects @mogulskier82 | 29-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/games-played-disconnects 2.- The server @Indipendenza | 29-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/the-server-2 3.-i lost - 100 + to server lag @joshuapro2021 | 30-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/i-lost-100-to-server-lag 4.- Do the admins have a plan? | @SweeetDollaTea | 05-05-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/do-the-admins-have-a-plan 5.- The server needs to be fixed ASAP | @Sairentogeiza | 06-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/the-server-needs-to-be-fixed-asap ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Letter 1.-The Harsh Reality of these Changes @Radon | 27-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/the-harsh-reality-of-these-changes 2.-Opinion Wanted, Here's Mine @Grathieben | 27-04-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/opinion-wanted-heres-mine 3.-⚔️ Cambios en la Plataforma de 4PC 🛡️ !? | Changes in the 4PC Platform !?⚔️ @martinaxo | 29-03-2022 https://www.chess.com/blog/martinaxo/cambios-en-la-plataforma-de-4pc-changes-in-the-4pc-platform4.- A message | @Darksquareman | 21-04-22 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-message-56 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Tournament 1.- Announcing the 2022 (Fourth) Online World 4 Player Chess FFA/Solo Championship (DISCUSSION) @fourplayerchess | 23-04-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/announcing-the-2022-fourth-online-world-4-player-chess-ffa-solo-championship-discussion 2.-New Standard Tournaments (Info & Discussion) @grable | 12-12-2021 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/new-standard-tournaments-info-discussion 3.- ⚔️New Tournament: "Modern FFA" 🛡️ Setup BSRTI | @martinaxo | 20-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/new-tournament-modern-ffa ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Articles of interest Team Players 1.- Four Chess Players Fundamentals | @MoreMao | 10-01-2021 https://www.chess.com/blog/MoreMao/chess-fundamentals-for-four 2.-4pc Fundamentals: basic concepts (pre-strategy) |@MoreMao | 25-01-2021https://www.chess.com/blog/MoreMao/4pc-fundamentals-basic-concepts-pre-strategy 3.-Free for All in 4PC: Ideas in the Early Four-Player Phase | @GustavKlimtPaints | 16-07-2020https://www.chess.com/blog/GustavKlimtPaints/free-for-all-in-4pc-ideas-in-the-early-four-player-phase 4.-The art of betrayal in FFA 4 Player Chess | @liquid-sun | 07-09-2021https://www.chess.com/blog/liquid-sun/the-art-of-betrayal-in-ffa-4-player-chess 5.- My Thoughs to all the discussions about Setup and Rating - | @Empty_K3 | 28-04-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/my-thoughs-to-all-the-discussions-about-setup-and-rating-empty-k3 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Puzzle 1.- Teams Puzzle (Red to Move) | @LazyImp | 11-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/teams-puzzle-red-to-move 2.- FFA Puzzle #5 (The Only Bad Move) | @Radon | 02-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/ffa-puzzle-5-the-only-bad-move 3.- FFA Puzzle #6 (Most Material, Most Points, Most Muppet) | @Radon | 04-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/ffa-puzzle-6-most-material-most-points-most-muppet4.-Puzzle? | @Darksquareman | 01-06-2022 https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/puzzle-8489 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ History 1.- ⚔️ Chaturaji 📜 History and Modernity 🛡️Poll: | @martinaxo | 10-05-2022https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/chaturaji-history-and-modernity ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Rules 1.- Rules & Reporting | @GDII | 20-06-2019https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/rules-reporting ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Top 100 The Best Players 4pc⚔️ Performance Top 100, of the Best Players in the World 🛡️ | @martinaxo | 01-06-22https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/performance-top-100-of-the-best-players-in-the-world▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Whenever I watch a twitch stream of a (for example) Spanish speaking channel, on their screen, the server text is always in English, even if the computer’s default language is Spanish. Of course there are multiple different languages but most players I’ve seen are from an English speaking country, Spanish, French and Vietnamese, so it’s probably a good idea to have a starting point. Sometimes words can be lost in translation, especially rules and special terms for 4PC. What’s the possibility of having volunteers or admins help translate the server?

When you time out do you turn into a rando type zombie why can’t you be a futer or a patzer

When you time out do you turn into a rando type zombie why can’t you be a futer or a patzer

When we play a game with a bot, we cannot take back because all the players should accept, and when there are a bot, we can't take back even if all the restant players are agree, there missing the vote of the bot. So i think that bots should be programed to accept automaticly take back (and draw/deal) What do you think so?

We have representatives from 13 countries on 4 Continents:North AmericaUSA: @JCrossover_14 @vrdtmr @Grathieben @Darksquareman South AmericaColombia: @MoreMaoPeru: @carlosgabriel1234Argentina: @rojitto EuropeNorway: @icystunUnited Kingdom: @RadonFrance: @IndipendenzaSpain: @jboleaAustria: @empty_K3Serbia: @neoserbian AsiaArmenia: @Cha_ChaRealSmoothBangladesh: @yasmin-er-vatarSri Lanka: @Suneth

I am a big teams player, and only played FFA 2 times before today, but now i decided to try FFA for real and im going to list my FFA attempts i made today. And a challenge for you! - Attempt 1: https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27443093/145/1a attempt 1 challenge: Find how red can win starting from turn 9, red to move. - Attempt 2: https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27443642/96/2 attempt 2 challenge: make blue win starting from turn 10, blue to move. - Attempt 3: https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27443898/242/3 attempt 3 challenge: make yellow win starting from turn 54, yellow to move. Post your opinions on my game performance and/or your solutions to the challenges!

Admin Team: “But Old Standard was on display…” Radon: “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” Admin Team: “That’s the display department.” Radon: “With a flashlight.” Admin Team: “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.” Radon: “So had the stairs.” Admin Team: “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?” Radon: “Yes, yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

Why cant @[username removed - Admin] chat when he plays?

pic : bruh bruh

I originally wanted to make this post to show that there is not much use in opening the qualifiers below 2.5k elo because nobody that low will qualify, but with the qualification of @Indipendenza I guess I was proven wrong. The graphic that you can see above is the accumulated elo distribution of the 15 qualifiers. (Lars is excluded)I took everybody's elo not as a single data point but as a Gauß-Curve and added those up. The number you can see on the left can be interpreted as the probability that a player plays at that certain elo. I added those probabilities up for 100-elo-steps to see how likely it is that a player is in a certain elo range: As you can see, there is a 20% chance that we see some 2200-2300 elo play. So you might argue there is a small chance that someone in this elo range does qualify. But as players vary in their strength this is just the worse performance of the weaker players who are ranging around 2500 elo. If you are wondering why some data points are above 100% or why these numbers ad up to 1500%: We have 15 players. Those are the added probabilities. I still believe there is not much use in opening qualifiers below 2500 elo, even if 2 players below that did qualify. But this post I made primarily for you to marvel at the beauty of mathematics. CheersMichael

It is totally clear that the overall arena system as for qualifiers is not adequate. Many threads have been done about that. But it is also clear that the Great and Wise Organisers chose it because it's much easier for them rather than organising matches manually like 2-4 years ago. Also, there is a clear contradiction between the need to ensure the best players be in the finals (=goal of any selection and qualifiers everywhere) and the need to enlarge the base, to increase number of the games, to let a chance to everybody, etc. And it's tricky. If you allow everybody, it creates a lot of lottery (unless arenas are very very long, 6-24 hours). If you don't allow everybody, it reduces the number of the players. If you let all the players together, it makes it almost impossible for the average (even rather good) player to qualify because only one is selected per arena. Etc. In addition, as for the semifinals, to have to select only one winner per batch creates distorsions because if you have 2 very strong players together (who normally should BOTH be in the finals), you are not sure to have really the best 4 players in the final (classical issue, that can't be solved totally, but can still be diminished a lot, cf. below). So being professionally involved in high level problem solving and used to optimisation under constraints, I had to invent a different system that would satisfy all levels' players and the admins as well, and wouldn't significantly increase their workload. Of course it's too late for 2022, but I submit you this proposal for 2023. As result of a lot of analysis of what happened in 2019, 2020, 2021 and currently in 2022. The championship is organised in 4 stages. STAGE 1 The organisers announce the date and the OFFICIAL BEGINNING of the championship. It's important because some players will be selected directly. So for instance at UTC+00 on 25th of May 2023 Luke will select the 10 highest rated players (OR 9 if the incumbent Champion is not among them (whatever the reason: he was not active or is rated 14th for example...). These 10 players will not be allowed to take part in the qualifiers (if they do even inadvertently, they are DQed). The other players, regardless of their rating (!), are allowed into arenas. The arenas are only organised during ONE week-end; there are 8 arenas with the duration of 4 hours (and 2 hours between them). I.e. Sat. and Sun. 0:00 UTC, 6:00 UTC, 12:00 UTC, 18:00 UTC. No limitation of participation of any kind. If someone is crazy enough to take part in all of them, he may. The top 7 players in each arena are given: 60, 40, 28, 20, 14, 10, 7 points. The results are summarised, and then 22 players with most points are selected for the Stage 2. So someone who will have reached the 2nd place 3 times will be selected (whereas today he is not at all...). (Because of the duration of the arenas and the fact that 7 places give points, and because 22 players are selected overall, and because the strongest 10 players will not be able to take part, statistically all the distorsions would disappear and we shall really have the 22 next strongest players selected). STAGE 2 The 32 players are put into two arenas A and B of 16 players only allowed (they will have to give their preferences as for schedules, and the organisers will choose the appropriate time in order to really suit all players). The duration will be 5 hours; after that the 8 first players are selected in each arena. If someone of 16 is not present, it's not a big problem. (NB: I am not aware; if currently it is not feasible technically to only allow SOME players into an arena - without having to invite them, in order to reduce the workload! -, Space will have to develop that feature within one year ) 4 other players (Nr. 9 and Nr. 10 in each arena A and B) will be put on a reserve list (to address the problem of no-shows in the Stage 2). They will have to be present during the semi-final if they want to have a chance to play. STAGE 3 : Semi-final 16 players are put into 4 groups of 4, classically, and play until someone reaches THREE victories, and thus qualifies for the final. Not less. In case of total or partial no-show, the player is replaced by a reserve player; if this reserve player manages to win 3 times himself, of course he passes to the final. NB: if for instance 3 games have been played, a player disconnects (power shortage for instance) and is replaced, but comes back for the next game, he is allowed to play again. After the stage 3, 4 other players (Nr. 2 of each group!) will be put on a reserve list (to address the problem of no-shows in the Stage 1). They will have to be present during the final if they want to have a chance to play. STAGE 4 : Final 4 players play together until someone reaches FIVE victories, and thus qualifies for the final. Not less. Similarly to the previous stage, in case of total or partial no-show, the player is replaced by a reserve player; if this reserve player manages to win 5 times himself, of course he is declared champion. NB: if for instance 3 games have been played, a player disconnects (power shortage for instance) and is replaced, but comes back for the next game, he is allowed to play again. I firmly believe that with such a system: - there are no more distorsions, - luck factor is definitely eliminated, - everybody is given a chance, - we are sure to have the best 16 players in the semi-final and the best 4 players in the final, - there is not too much work for the organisers as most of the selection is still done during the arenas, but without the current defects.