A kind of chess paradox?

I was just thinking, what if a grandmaster, for example, Capablanca plays against 2 people simultaneously and he plays white on person 1 and black on person 2. And when Capablanca moves a piece in the game where he is white, his opponent 2 (white since Capablanca is black) will make the same move and vise versa and both his opponents will just copy Capablanca's moves, what will happen then? It's just like Capablanca is playing against himself.

Interesting thought... IDK I guess Capablanca would not play that in the first place and would be white on all or black on all. I think thats how it goes with all simuls

Derren Brown did this to beat Grandmasters.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1610

Well my point is, what if 2 persons do that to you? If you win on the other it means you lose on the other? or what? This bugs me seriously xD

It should not bug you.  If you are playing two players you just need to be sure they are not collaberating against you.

called "mirror moves" , G.M.s ? .....IT has occurred on chess .com w/  tourn. games where two games are played.

But the question is "what if they are collaborating against me?'" I want to know if there is a way to end with the same result on both games.

Draw both lol

Or wait until they make a move, and not move until they do.

A fracture in the time space continuum resulting in a micro worm hole no doubt.

I would not call this a paradox at all. It would indeed be as if Capablanca were playing himself. It could perhaps be thought of as an odd form of single-line analysis with himeself. Capablanca would make his move as White and then have to respond to hisown move as Black. I will address this problem from a theorectical and practical stance.

Theorectically, the outcome would be simple. If Capablanca wins on one board, he loses on the other. If he draws on either board, he draws on both. If this simul is about most points, Capablanca can just draw (since he actually has full control over both games), coming out 1 full point to each of his opponants half points. Capabalnca wins!

As this is a form of cheating in chess, neither player playing Capablanca can honestly get any real satisfaction in drawing the higher rated player. Practically speaking, neither would get recognition for doing so either as even an incompetent moderator would catch on to the scheme (if not, at least one of the thousands of analysts who look at the games post facto certainly would!).

So there you have it: no paradox, no confusion. It is a mildly interesting thought experiment, but don't let it keep you up at night!

Capablanca could just focus on one board for a few moves. He doesn't have to play them in the same amount of moves.

You're right.

For example if Capa played 1.e4 on one board and his opponent there played 1...e5, Capa could avoid this by playing 1...c5 on the other board even if that opponent also played 1.e4.

well if that happens then yeah capa will win one and lose one

You sir made my day :D

Can't remember the specifics, maybe someone else can.  Heard a story where two players attempted this.  The master made a move on one board that looked like an error (or something like this) and one of the conspirators didn't copy it.  Both went on to lose.

A simple way of stopping it is playing the same color on both boards.

as posted before, Capa simply needs to make one move different in one game, and then that stops the copying. The rather stupid assumption behind this is that there is always only one good reply to each move. We all know this is not true. And Capa would know a few more opening variations than the amateurs he is playing against.

If player #1 responds to Capa's 1.e4 with 1...e5, then he's not doing it right. He's supposed to wait and see what Capa does as Black on the other board.

I might be mistaken but the way i recall it works is that the other players are supposed to make a move when the master returns to his/her board. Capablanca could skip making a move on one board and return to another board, and having that person be ahead in moves.

If the players wait for him to make a move before copying it, and never move before then, play will alternate one move at a time between the boards.  And so it will be impossible to "make a different move" as you suggest.