Debate: What to call "Online Chess"...

  • #841

    what about "cheaterchess"?

  • #842

    "Daily Chess" yuk !

    "Digital Postal Chess" ?

  • #843

    chess for the undead

  • #844
    goldendog wrote:

    That's what she...

    ...said.  Lol nice dog

  • #845

    Why is correspondence chess still not being used... Lol

  • #846
    Pawnpusher3 wrote:

    Why is correspondence chess still not being used... Lol

    That the term that I use when I blog about what I do here.

     

    http://chessskill.blogspot.com/search/label/correspondence

  • #847

    Correspondingly ...how about "Chess Restante" similar to well known correspondence usage of Post Restante?

  • #848

    fortnight chess

  • #849

    Paul Revere Chess

  • #850

    Rebound Chess

  • #851

    Your typical online chess player:

  • #852

    This thread has revealed the amazing number of comedians there are in chess.com's membership. Who could have guessed it? It might not be quite so pathetic, though, if at least a few of them had any wit or cleverness at all about them. By the way, "online chess" and "turn-based chess" are truly lame designations for what is merely a computerized version of correspondence chess. Pardon me for stating the painfully obvious, but all "online chess" games played on this site are online chess; and, in all of those "turn-based games," the players always take turns making their moves. Thus, all the tortured efforts herein to imagine "creative" names simply collapse logic and common sense in upon themselves. The absurdly strenuous efforts in this thread put one in mind of the old saying: "The mountains go into labor, and are delivered of a mouse." It really takes no effort of any intellectual proportion to make the conceptual leap from postal chess to its computerized, slightly modified counterpart, all the while using the same term that would be familiar to anyone who is any kind of chess player at all, i.e., correspondence chess. Aren't there any other more useful, potentially productive things to which we can turn our attention and efforts as we try to cope with this nightmarish monstrosity which chess.com and its propellor heads suddenly foisted upon their customers? And no apologies to the propellor heads, either. In fact, I suggest they use their next vacation to visit the real world just to see it. If there is anything they are not overly burdened with, it's a sense of reality.

  • #853

    I agree Sooner. Why call it something it's not.

    It's Correspondence Chess. None of the other given names truly represents it well. Everyone who wants to play it will play it, regardless of what you  call it, so  might as well stick to what it actually is. And you can add a small grey line under the title  to help the casual players who don't understand the term, if Erik is still concerned about players not understanding the term. Not like 'Daily Chess' explains what it is any  better or any other name dropped here.  I personally don't think changing the name is going to be a marketing advantage for the above reasons given, because no new names dropped here any better explained what the games are.

    To  me changing the name to something like 'daily chess' or 'anytime chess' or any of the other names given, most being corny/silly names, puts the game of chess on par with the game of tiddly winks. Chess isn't that basic and we don't need to treat the players as if they are basic. We just need to help the casual players understand the term maybe.  Sorry if I offended any tiddly winks players here.

  • #854

    what about chess4cheats?

  • #855

    what about chess4cheatsbecausethereisnocentaurpoolhere ?

  • #856

    Did you loose a game :)

    Don't be so negative!

    I love kebab 2 btw :)

  • #857

    The one thing that distinguishes correspondence chess from other forms of chess right now is the RAMPANT amount of cheating involved IMHO :) so it only seems appropriate

  • #858

    I wasn't being negative MonteChristosPawn, just stating the fact. :)

    For many anyway, the ones who wouldn't cheat if there was a Centaur pool here. I concede 'some' will still use engines in the main pool and cheat even if there was a Centaur pool here and they should be banned if caught, but many will be happy to play in their own designated respected non-interfering pool, if given that opportunity. It will get them out of the main pool and everyone will be as happy as Larry.. except the die hard engine haters who would rather see them burn in hell than be allowed to play here, even if they are playing in a pool that has nothing to do with them. Personally I would never use one, never care to use one, but I know many do love them. It's obvious because we all know many use them here. :) So give them a place to play and the majority of engine users should no longer be damaging the ratings of the non engine users nor the pleasure of the game for them. :)

    It's a win/win for everyone. 

  • #859
    Stampnl wrote:

    The one thing that distinguishes correspondence chess from other forms of chess right now is the RAMPANT amount of cheating involved IMHO :) so it only seems appropriate

    It is 'RAMPANT" Stampni, I agree with you. Time a solution was found.

    Post #898 is the solution.

  • #860

    Well , if you cheat you gain nothing babs.

    So you win the real trophy ;-)

or Join

Online Now