FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
How did it get to the server? How does it get to your computer?
I earlier suggested "Simultaneous Chess" or "Simul Chess," but the idea was met with resounding silence, so I'll move on.
Simultaneous Chess has more to do with the style of the player and not much to do with the style or method of play.
In a similar sense you could call it Audio chess since some players may like the sound effects. But this doesn't really describe the game, but rather the player's preference.
I myself don't see much point in playing 50 games at once, and would hope that in the future they will implement a system that allows me to play against people who tend to play few games as well, so that I know they are more likely putting more thought into their play, without me having to hunt for these people myself. You can already play against people who tend to make quicker moves.
Packets of data are sent. Same way Live Chess works.
Later we hated that name and changed it to "Online Chess". But all chess is online...
I know it's a little late in the topic, but how is all chess online?
I'm fairly sure he meant all chess play online here.
Ah. I was thinking that, but I wan'tsure why he worded it like that.
Yeah, there seems to be a misconception that correspondence refers specifically to mail. Mail is one example of correspondence, and since it was such a good adjective to describe it they became somewhat synonymous.
If you look at the actual definition of correspondence, it's non-concurrent distance communication between parties. The medium itself is irrelevant. In that sense, it's actually the perfect adjective for turn based chess here.
Your point seems to be an extremely difficuly one to grasp. Most folks just don't see it that way.
Distance isn't relevant. I can play someone in china as easily as in my very own home. Just one more reason why it doesn't fit anymore.
Not sure why the temporal aspect is ignored, as that is the only way to accurately describe it. Else you could be describing any type of chess played here with that term.
So it doesn't all stay on the server....
It all stays on the server, but is visible on your screen because information was sent to you. I sorta think that's what you said.
Easy for you to say. When was the last time you wrote a letter...make that typed a letter on a typewriter?
I go back not only to the electric typewriter but the manual typewriters. I go back to ice boxes, radio days and carbon paper.
With all due respect, Cookiemonster, the next time you go back, please stay there. Samuel Morse is dead and do is his code unless you are traped in a air pocket in a capsized boat and have to bang out SOS. Welcome to the 21st century.
Well, my moves originate with me, it doesn't get to the server until I enter it into my computer and submit it, and even then it still has to make it's way to my opponent's computer, who may or may not be present to see it.
If that's not correspondence, I don't know what is.
The term Simul has an entirely different meaning in chess, although it has some bearing in correspondence because most players are indeed conducting their own little simuls against opponents who each have their own simuls against others who have theirs, and on until every single chess player in the world is absorbed into a single event.
Mine is actually literal-minded as well.
Correspondence Chess - Wikipedia
Correspondence chess is chess played by various forms of long-distance correspondence, usually through a correspondence chess server, through email or by the postal system; less common methods which have been employed include fax and homing pigeon.
All qualify as correspondence....
I'll repeat: The medium itself is irrelevant.
Turn based play here is non-concurrent communication of chess moves over a distance just like it was with telegraph, just like it was with postcards and just like it was with e-mail.
Correspondence is an entirely appropriate -- in fact, a perfect -- adjective.
TheGrobe's conceptual approach is much more reasonable and realistic than chessplayer11's literal-minded approach is. The difference is just more evidence that the name should obviously be "correspondence chess." But let's skip the gimmiky "echess." The venerable game of chess should be accorded more dignity by those who are devoted to it.
I think Erik meant all online chess is online chess.. e.g. Live chess is also played online.. hence the term 'online chess' won't differentiate between correspondence chess (ding!) and live chess.
I think TheGrobe's approach to the naming issue is conceptual, not literal, because his emphasis is on the concept of two distant chess players playing a game of chess by long-distance transmissions of their moves regardless of the literal means of the transmission. That means that the term "correspondence chess" can reasonably and understandably with historical continuity be used to designate any of them and is thus the best name. That's very different from chessplayer11's idea that, somehow, the literal means of transmission requires a different name for each one. His thinking is therefore not very sophisticated or flexible, to put the best face on it.