Variants Q&A

Decision making

What is the precise interaction between Chess.com paid staff and volunteer admins?

WHO takes the decisions about 4p chess and HOW?

How are the decisions are taken?

• There are a few Chess.com paid staff working on variants, including project management, community development and software development. They communicate directly with volunteer admins for a variety of reasons, including bug reporting, rule enforcement and general feedback. This feedback gets incorporated into internal workflows which also combines broad/strategic decisions from Chess.com. In some cases (e.g. a big decision), further discussion is had with community members and 4PC experts, both directly and through polls.
• It’s a pretty informal process and in the world of four-player chess with ducks and spells, it’s genuinely difficult to strike a balance. We want to leverage the passion of the community (e.g. the incredible CGAdmins, cool tools like Variants World) while still integrating with the bigger Chess.com world.

Was merging 2PC and 4PC variants truly the best direction for 4 Player Chess? How has 4 PC benefited from this merge?

• I'm going to try and explain some facets of the initial decision and its future potential, which hopefully can be separated from the execution of “The Merge”.
• A main reason was that the 4PC technology was at odds with the direction the rest of the site was going. This makes sense as something that grew from a small independent project. This gap could only widen and so paying this “tech debt” as early as possible was desirable. 4PC always existed in a bit of a silo, so making this technical switch would allow for easily consolidating the visual look of the app, increasing accessibility for other team members to contribute and creating opportunities for Variants to benefit from other Chess.com tech.
• Even before the merge, 2PC was always around, just not nearly as prevalent. I know the transition was rough and putting them on equal footing was jarring to 4PC players. It's the hope that increased traffic to the Variants app for things like Duck & Spell Chess, which would naturally have a two-player focus, will be a benefit for 4PC.
• The power of Variants is its flexibility, which allows for the same system to handle different boards, different game rules, 2 vs 4 players and FFA vs Teams. The flexibility can be overwhelming and disorienting at times, but we believe that we can minimize this while enhancing their synergy going forward, however the transition has gone thus far.

Would it be possible to reconsider the decision to have together 4p and 2p chess variants in the same space (that I personally think to be catastrophic)? It's definitely 2 different universes and only a very narrow minority uses both.

• No, it was a one-way door. “The Merge” did cause a lot of problems, but it wasn’t the addition of 2pc at the root. With the right direction and community building, the two can coexist with mutual benefit.

Setups

Why was New Standard chosen over better starting positions such as the BY setup? Was the BY setup considered before making such a drastic change? Will there be a change in starting positions, or is New Standard permanent now?

New Standard set in stone? I'll also add, If not, what circumstances would cause another change in the starting position?

Why 3 different setups?

• This was one of the bigger recent decisions and it was hard. There was a desire to switch away from Old Standard because it’s not balanced, though generally favored by seasoned high-elo players. BY was considered, but we had to make a choice and ultimately went with Standard. The other options were kept around to appeal to users who prefer them, but Standard is the default to try and avoid splitting the player base too much. New Standard is not set in stone, but any change should be heavily discussed.

Why not organize 3 FFA 4PC world championships for each setup?

• This is something that’s on our radar and will come up as we continue with more community-based efforts like the Community Series!

There should be 3 different leaderboards, as it is 3 different games.

• This is definitely possible, but we’d want to see a case made for it, including momentum from the community.

4pc Points

Changing the Standard position and FFA points system have been the biggest detriments to the game, will these issue ever be addressed?

It could be argued there are some flaws in FFA gameplay; for a way over-simplified example, results do not always match up with good play (players get fourth despite playing "well"). Is this generally (optimizing FFA strategic gameplay) seen as an issue or goal by you all?

• The question about the Standard position is addressed above.
• The FFA point system has been the subject of active (and heated) discussions for a long time. The changes were made as a result of these discussions and while it’s not perfect, it does a pretty good job. We’re keeping it in mind ongoing, but, similar to Standard, we’d need to hear strong cases and see community momentum before any change.

+1 points for double check. Is this feature intentional to give the player with the last queen the victory?

• This has honestly just not come up very often (or at all?) from what we can tell. Either it just doesn’t impact games very much or people aren’t talking about it. There’s no official record of it, but one team member recalls it was “in 2017 and was added to avoid passive play, meaningless piece shuffling, endless games.”

Game Stats

A bunch of questions requested stats or referenced specific things (e.g. general 4p, Teams, Chaturaji). We had a recent push to pull and aggregate different Variants stats, so some of those results will be shared when they’re done.

KotH is one of the most dead variants on the site, but STILL is the first selected variant for the "Community Series" over others like 4pc, spellchess, Duck Chess, and Chaturaji.

• KotH is one of those weird crossovers that highlights the historic split between Chess.com and Variants (see other answers for context). It’s not the most popular on Variants, though it very much alive, however it is quite active on https://www.chess.com/play/online! The community series has sparked a lot of internal conversations about community development and bridging the gap between Chess.com and Variants.

Misc

Would Chess.com be able to implement daily time controls for variants like Gothic Chess, Seirawan Chess, and so on?

• Daily games are an awesome way to hop in and play a game at a pace that matches your lifestyle. In the future, Variants could include this feature, but for now there are other priorities.

The ergonomics of the current Variants site, its structure, is all but user-friendly, and it's a HUGE barrier for retaining the players.

There’s just too much. Limit the scope of what a new user can see? “And only after 50 or even 100 games in this format they will be given access to the full and rich universe that we have now.”

• This is definitely on the radar of active development. We’re going to try and be strategic with it as we look to integrate more deeply with Chess.com and refine the Variants user experience in general.

These answers don't shed new light on anything we didn't already know. We shut down the League due to lack of support from Chess.com, but mainly due to the direction 4 Player Chess has taken. I like many players am no longer interested in playing 4 Player Chess, as there doesn't seem to be anything to look forward to, and the current state of the game leaves a LOT to be desired.

The starting position and FFA changes were made despite community backlash, while little to no consideration was made to the BY setup.

"New Standard is not set in stone, but any change should be heavily discussed."

Good luck all.

The questions about the future have yet to be answered.

It'd also be helpful to me if you give some context because, while I was already aware of some of these past events, I'm not fully "in the loop": I don't know who "we" is nor what you "already know". I knew some of the questions were loaded, but still went out to try and find answers.

Consider this an open dialogue and feel free to elaborate so we can take a closer look at any given thing.

I would recommend that you read this post that I made a while ago: https://www.chess.com/blog/ChessMasterGS/the-forgotten-feature-variants-on-chess-com

One of the main issues is that the "higher-ups" (staff) that some people talk about aren't able to answer questions on their own on some of the more basic questions on this issue. One basic indicator is that the managers of the VCS have never played any variants on the variants server and struggle to answer /variants things that people ask about, or that Danny Rensch didn't rehearse an answer to the variants server question I had in last year's State of Chess.com and wasn't aware of the issue with server crashing entirely, never mind being transparent about it.

That isn't to say that our current staff are completely out of the loop and of course asking colleagues shouldn't be frowned upon, but if we had 4PC admins having the ability to directly communicate with staff, then the communication would be a lot more fluid.

I would definitely also recommend getting answers that are less vague, like @LosChess referenced. A lot of this stuff has been repeated before, albeit not by staff, so it's nice that it's being said, but I think the answer to the question about standard setups was indeed lacking, mainly because it didn't focus on the discussions with the 4PC veteran communities and rather presented an argument for why "New Standard" was made the default, something that again, has been repeated before. I would've personally asked "why was Old Standard switched out despite the backlash", but I don't know if you'd be able to get that answer out of anyone.

I also believe that what some people are looking for is a public announcement (on the 4PC or Variants club) by chess.com that perhaps reflects on the 2022 era and has chess.com take responsibility for the lack of transparency; for my article, I had to rely entirely on forum threads and personal experience as sources because I couldn't find anything except for small comments by admins, and very rarely developers (of course, because at that time there was a shortage).

Also, just as a note, the VCS and Spell Chess arenas are extremely unappealing to Pan-American players because it's always on weekdays during extremely inconvenient times for anyone not working from home or working as a streamer. I suppose that could be a reason why not many people talk about a lot or believe it's relevant to them, in addition to the content creation based around the event being basically nonexistent outside of maybe Twitch.

4pc is almost unplayable with this server. im basically disconnecting in 1/3 - 1/5 games and losing on time. Seems its a bug. Either u are looking at someone else thinking and then suddenly your the one who times out, or you suddenly just lose seconds in an instant. Many times i've had 3 seconds left which magically vanishes in an instant to a timeout . 3 seconds disappeared in a millisecond. This never used to happen before the last update where disconnections were very rare.

It seems the recent update had made server stability much worse contrary to what is being said here.

Fast games like blitz and bullet have bugs, I recommend playing 10 minute games

See: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/variants-q-a?page=2#comment-97579771

It’s gotten better than what was the case in 2022 in the months after the merge of variants and 4PC, but ofc it’s worse now because of this bug

Keeping this post open to continue tracking this. It's possible anything related to clocks skipping or early timeouts are the same thing. As of ~3 weeks ago, the major cause that I knew of (bots) was significantly reduced, but someone just posted another case that I verified always happens: a game you lost ends while you're in a new game.

If there are other things happening, please let us know!

I agree that a question like this would be tough to answer. It involves answering so many other questions (e.g. how much discussion was had, where, when how etc., what was the backlash) and is a bit more "justice seeking" than "fact seeking" from where I'm sitting. This would be hard to do for a recent event and harder as an archaeology project. I will read the article and dig a bit more, though if what's really wanted is an apology, like this:

then I'm genuinely unsure about how to even go about this, but again, I will see.

Hi @goondrious,
The truth is that we must return to this debate, once again.
According to Carlos question:

>Why was New Standard chosen instead of better starting positions like the BY configuration?

The reality is that BY was never considered before making such a drastic change.

This decision was made even before the new administration arrived at Variantes. Later this was one of the first topics that started the discussion.

Due to the starting position, Teams suffered a big blow. There was never any real recovery after that.
>We asked ourselves: are there any plans to improve Teams activity?

There was never a plan, TEAM was completely forgotten, that's the truth. We ourselves even tried to create a TEAM league, organized independently in Discord 4PCL, and this could never come to fruition, since the interest of many traditional or recurring players at that time was lost, and it also happened that we never had the sufficient support from chess.com.
Yes, we can feel proud of having managed to organize the FFA league, which took place in 2 seasons of 4 months each, However, this will be achieved, mainly with the support of LosChes and Radon, otherwise it would not have happened.

For many months this problem was discussed and considered and finally it was determined that the best configuration for 4pc is BY. It is the version that provides greater virtues and qualities that benefit the quality of the game and mainly, feeling the emotion in its playability.
However, we are still forced to play on the main Setup ( where The king is on the right side for all players), which we feel this should be a secondary option on the platform.

I consider that a reasonable amount of time has passed to know the current configuration and see its performance and this does not meet the best of all.

I have a full report detailing all of its downsides and advantages.

I will send you detailed information on everything regarding this matter. Additionally, I will send you my next project, which consists of a new competition format for 4pc.

what is BY configuration?

Check the setups list in 4 Player Chess on the server; BY Setup is one of the 3 setups

Thanks. I checked it out and I don't really understand specifically why BY would be better but it sorta feels better, and after thinking through a few openings & mid games I have some vague ideas about why BY would be better.

You raise good points definitely @matinaxo I would just like to ask if we're really sure about BY Setup being the best version. Because I don't remember reaching this understanding?

The debate surrounding starting positions is crucial for the progress of 4PC and I'm glad to see it mentioned more again. I think we should still do more research and testing. Let's not yet discount some other setups from the possible 16 positions as well.

I'd also like to add that in general there's been some inactivity and a clear lack of leadership with respect to the future of 4PC and Variants. It seems we've forgotten some of the discussions that were being had about 2 years ago. Starting Positions, Rating Systems and everything in between... We ought to revisit those, go back to the drawing board and in some instances start anew in some of these aspects. Due to this, I can imagine that it's also difficult for the (very few) new staff members to comprehend what's going on with the state of the communities and the direction things are going. We're losing time, the quicker we build momentum and start solving even the smallest of issues from the ground up, the better it is for everyone. Unfortunately damage has already been done with some of the old playerbase leaving, and recently the 4 Player Chess League being discontinued...

Thanks to the people who made this forum the idea was nice

When you look at the 4pc community as a whole, the whole situation made everything stuck. They got rid of the starting position, so people who didn't like that left, but not really, because they partially kept other setups and are leaving the door open for changes in the future.

My point is, those in charge need to make a firm decision on this, whether by doing what Cha said or standing firm with the current decisions. "New Standard is not set in stone, but any change should be heavily discussed," while I really understand the rational behind it, is not a good answer.

Hi @Cha_ChaRealSmooth, The truth is that it is very necessary to return to this issue, we need the reactivation of the 4pc.
What happens is that you participated only in the first debate, after that there was or continued the discussion of this same issue in discord on 2 more occasions, and you did not participate, since you did not express any type of opinion, that is why that you don't remember, you simply weren't there, and the last one wasn't 2 years ago, it was approximately 5 or 6 months ago. So I really need you to get more involved in this, you are one of the best promoters in the world. Many players, including me, have learned a lot from you, it was great to see your transmissions, because one really ended up understanding this excellent game much more, the transmissions of ProfBlundermaster, Radon, and Luke and other exponents are also missed.

So how can we re-enchant ourselves with this game, as we did before the merger?

We have reviewed and experienced several initial positions, we have had reports from CGA specialists, where they demonstrate according to their analysis that BY Setup is one of the best options for 4pc.

There have been 2 BY tournaments, which have left a pleasant feeling and a very good experience, the gameplay is excellent and exciting, the quality is much higher, it surpasses the old standard and the current standard by far.
Eyes are on 4pc right now by the chess.com administration, so it's the best time to make the changes we need. 
I want to enjoy the game, that is fair and balanced for all colors, reduce the abandonment of games in the first move, that there are wide varieties of opening and not the forced game that exists today at the beginning of the opening, too monotonous For all colors, you have very limited options at game startup.

ok but, if we want to keep the 3 options available, we need to improve 2 important things:

- The name of each setup
- What he said JkCheeseChess
> we should include a separate section for OS and BY so that people can actually see those as options instead of having to go into Standard.So, here again we see the need to be able to reproduce a version different from the official standard, it is now impossible to complete a queue in another secondary format.

The Format "Old Setup", It is definitely not a good name for a setup, which is still very active by only elite players, which is mainly in the league. All users only play the main format available, as they just want to fill up the game queue as quickly as possible.

Another viable solution or route would be to separate the leaderboard, and for all of them to work independently, since strictly speaking it is the same game, but with a totally different theory. That is why I still think that we should only have a single format and not 3 options, since all these versions, the only thing it does is confuse things more in my opinion.

So what is better for you, continue with 3 different formats of the same game, or have only 1? And what should be the main format?
Saying omatamix , old standard, BY, BYG, is too confusing for users, compared to an appropriate name for each game or version. Finally, the main name of the game is Four Player Chess, which in my opinion should exist in a single format.

More than 1 year ago, some additional appreciations:

- No one would have imagined that they would prefer to vote for the current official standard (Omatamix).
- Also to say that many of those who voted for old standard consider that BY is better, but they voted for old standard thinking that BY would have few votes.
- It is also true that some elite experienced players have already gotten used to the official standard and prefer it.
- The first Omatamix World Champion is an elite experienced player.

I take advantage of mentioning that when all the great changes in Variants occurred and that great universal flood that we all experienced occurred, they only came to discuss in the forums, a number of no more than 50 people, remember?, I remember it quite well, which seemed very strange to me, that in the face of such a big change very few users participated in this discussion. We also received important letters from the best players in the world, which I think we should consider.

Do we really want to continue with this setup format, where we know very well that it is not the best and wait for the rest of the year or until the next FFA world championship?

I hope they are efficient sometime!

So my criticism is that hasty decisions have always been made, very brutal changes, and they have not given it enough time nor have they taken into consideration the opinion of the main experts in 4pc and what it deserves. There is always that feeling of making decisions without notifying anyone and totally biased, that is the reality.

There is another factor to take into account when users vote on the platform:

Always keep in mind that most of the players have no idea about anything, they have never heard of oma or BY, they don't read forums, they don't watch the best games, they have never heard of the league, etc. they don't know what the old standard is, maybe this sounds radical, but it's the truth.
This makes me think and disagree with some of you when you say:

- That we are going to lose the player base again.
- That we are not ready for another Setup change.
- That 4pc will not be what it was before, etc.

Honestly today I think that none of this is going to happen, and time has shown me, since today the vast majority of elite players have returned, but they play less naturally or less than before, but they have returned only because there is an important event or only to play sporadically just because there is an need to play a chess with 4 armies and I can also add that many new players with good skills have arrived.
The problem is that we are not playing in the best 4pc format, this is not the best version for the game and there are many who agree with this, But honestly there are also many who are not interested in participating in forums, networks like Discord and giving their opinion on the matter, they only settle for what is available in the system and that's it.
I will send all the information I have available on this matter, to reinforce the analysis we already did some time ago. I just hope that they consider it, and don't leave it in the book of memories, I really hope that action is taken once and for all.

We cannot go back to the old standard where we already know it is not the best for FFA in all categories from novice to elite. Nor can we continue with the current Setup where all those forced plays and low variety of openings are clearly appreciated, among other difficulties that we have mentioned before.

BY Setup, It's a great compromise between Old Std and current Standard,
I am totally convinced of that!

We were with old standard for many years, then omatamix had its chance and that disagreement still exists.

I hope that in 2024, BY Setup will have the opportunity to be explored in depth, sometime. I am sure that regular players or users will continue playing normally, but this time the game will be much more exciting, since it offers greater virtues in its playability.

@ChessMasterGS
I don't think Chacha needs you as a lawyer, and I consider that all the debates and discussions we have had, both internally and publicly, have involved very relevant or important people in this matter, such as expert players and current administrators.

As @martinaxo mentioned above, whom we've had extensive discussions and tests with different setups, we've confidently concluded that out of the 3 available setups they rank in this order of popularity and playability: BY > Old Standard > New Standard.

Admins needed to make a change of setups, since Old Standard was "imbalanced" and at the time the BY setup had limited analysis by @bsrti, and despite the community's backlash during the Month long tournament, they changed it to New Standard anyway.

Even the #1 player in 4PC wasn't heard by @spacebar.

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/balance-3?page=6

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/balance-3?page=4#comment-65989909

I can only speak for myself, my frustration comes from the fact we have voiced our opinion for almost 2 years, and all our feedback has been ignored. I suspect that the admins responsible for making the setup change DO NOT play 4pc on a daily basis like we all used to, and they should not have made such a drastic change that affected the entire community and caused many top players to leave the game.

Unless players are playing more games per day than they used to, I don't see how 4pc will continue to grow.

While I agree that Old Setup wasn't the most balanced, it was really fun to play despite its flaws. New Standard is worse in many ways due to its forcing repetitive nature. This flaw is exposed the most in Teams, where it's no longer played. We have data available, some of it is linked below where we can confidently state that BY setup is the best setup out of the 3 available options.

I agree with you @Cha_ChaRealSmooth that more extensive testing needs to be done with all the setups, but who's gonna do the testing? I'm not confident that the current Administration will test all the different setups and actually make the change needed, especially when they only considered the Omatamix setup. In the links below the BYG setup is preferred by some, but I still prefer the BY setup due to its familiarity to Old Standard, opening variety and just being more fun to play.

We no longer have 4PC streamers, a lot of top players have left, and the community has become largely fragmented.

@goondrious "New Standard is not set in stone, but any change should be heavily discussed."

As you know, I was ready to automate the League Leaderboards by using Chess.com's API, but instead the League was abruptly shut down. It shutdown due to the lack of Chess.com support, New Standard is here to stay, and admins DO NOT plan on changing the starting position. After further analysis even @omatamix thinks BY setup should be the standard as you can see below. He's the one that discovered that the game "would be more balanced if blue and greens queens and kings were switched."

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/balance-3

What's it going to take to change the Standard starting position?

Here's just some of the community's feedback on the changes which @martinaxo has gathered. All these polls have the BY setup winning.

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/poll-setup-four-player-chess

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/suggestion-book-2

Setup Discussions

1.- All Setups | @At_d0sA_fNLt_Laris | 28/04/2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/all-setups

2.- 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

3.- ⚔️It's not Old Standard | it's not Omatamix🛡️ Poll: @martinaxo | 22-04-2022

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/its-not-old-standard-its-not-omatamix

4.- BY Setup: 1.h3 c7 h12 Analysis | @LazyImp | 29-04-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/brsti-setup-1-h3-c7-h12-analysis

5.- A radical proposal / about the set-up | @Indipendenza | 27-04-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-radical-proposal-about-the-set-up

6.-Bsrti-invert might be the best setup | @empty_K3 | 25-04-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/bsrti-invert-might-be-the-best-setup

7.-Omatamix is boring? - I don't think so! | @empty_K3 | 02-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/omatamix-is-boring-i-dont-think-so

8.-What was wrong with Old Standard? | @daveborn | 02-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/what-was-wrong-with-old-standard

9.-One Change Might Be All We Need - And It's Probably The Hardest One | 21-06-2022
https://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? @LosChess | 26-04-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/why-is-sfa-standard-now

2.-🧐 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 | 19-04-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/return-ffa-to-old-scoring-system-of-2-winners

4.-FFA rating calculation | @bnjboyd | more than 1 month
https://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 | 14-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/why-the-ffa-rating-system-should-change

7.-A clear example of why the FFA rating system should change
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-clear-example-of-why-the-ffa-rating-system-should-change

1.- Suggestion: feedback boxes | @HSCCCalebBrown | 20-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/suggestion-feedback-boxes

2.-Suggestion: Resigning in Teams | @Green_Sleeves | 16-02-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/suggestion-resigning-in-teams

3.-Updates to 4 Player Chess | @LosChess | 01-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/upcoming-changes?page=21#comment-69227747

4.-Variants Server Suggestions [Post-4PC Merge] | @grable | 25-03-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/variants-server-suggestions-post-4pc-merge?page=1

5.- Wording of Rules Proposal | @HSCCCalebBrown | 21-12-2021
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/wording-of-rules-proposal

6.- Rename FFA & Teams | @HSCCCalebBrown | 23-12-2021
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/rename-ffa-teams

7.- A new setup proposal: BYG switch. | @bsrti | 09-06-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/a-new-setup-proposal-byg-switch

8.- 11-07-2023 | Proposal: Reduce All FFA Standard Ratings by 700
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/proposal-reduce-all-ffa-standard-ratings-by-700?page=1

@HSCCCalebBrown

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

⚔️ All Topics Relevant 4PC 🛡️ Monitoring and Management🧐

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Top Player

⚔️ Performance Top 100, of the Best Players in the World 🛡️ | @martinaxo | 16-05-2022
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/performance-top-100-of-the-best-players-in-the-world

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬