Conditional moves.

You know when you got the game won, and your opponent c'ant possibly win, but he keeps on playing...It gets annoying but its not the end of the world...

In conditional moves, It would be a neat feature if, whatever move your opponent chooses, do this... or something of the sort.

In one of my games, my opponent can't possibly stop my pawn from promoting, whatever move he makes, I push my pawn up. The thing is, my pawn is on the 6th rank and I'm black.

I agree with you: hopeless opponents are annoying. My experience suggests that even with the proper conditional move they wont play faster, they're stalling. Even so, if you upgrade your membership you can make unlimited condional lines per move.

no...Whatever my opponent moves, I move my pawn up one...I don't what to do every possibility.

And my opponent is not stalling, he plays slowly, as do I, he just won't resign...its just in this case, it would make every thing go much faster.

The possibilities are exponential... If I want to play 4 pawn moves whatever he does, and he has 3 pawns,  there is  3^4 possible moves... Thats allot.

I'm not that keen on the game  finishing quickly, he takes his time, so I go do other stuff. Its just I went in conditional moves thinking I could do this, and I can't...Bummer 

I've wanted to do this too! It would be a very useful feature

This seem to be even more evident when playing against players in tournaments and usually have high ratings.  It's like they are hoping you make a mistake or they could win on time. When the game starts you are getting a response a soon as you make a move. When you are up or in a dominating position they use all the time alloted. It's sad!!!!!

I want that feature (conditional move - he does "whatever" I do X) too!

It can't be that hard to program, or so it would seem, since Premove in Live chess does exactly this. (In fact premove is like conditional moves but you can only put in 'he does whatever' I do 'x' sequences).

BUMP

Yeah, that would be good.

The programming might not be as simple as you would think.  For instance, there may be an illogical but legal move in a given position that makes your "whatever" move illegal.   Of course, your move could not be allowed in that case, but the programming would have to take this possibility into consideration when applying your move.  The way conditional moves are set now, you may only enter legal moves, so this error checking is not needed.

Another thing to consider...  Back in the day, I used to play a bit of postal chess, and once received a post card from a player who stated, "On any, 8...Qd5".  Well, that being the case, I moved 8.Nxb6 capturing a well defended pawn, leaving my poor knight en prise.  My opponent was legally committed to the move 8...Qd5 and promptly lost her majesty when I then played 9.Nxd5.  My opponent complained bitterly, stating that he meant any REASONABLE move, and I retorted that 8.Nxb6 was completely reasonable since I knew what he was going to play!  This couldn't happen on Chess.com, because the opponent doesn't know if a conditional move is scheduled, or what it might be.  But the point is that there may be unforeseen consequences to this feature. 

I have thought this would be a handy feature too, and would like to see it implemented.  Care would be required, I'm sure.

Brian

When I was playing postal an " if any "  then x   was binding..... and I never heard of anyone getting a "takeback" in postal chess !  The cards ( back then we used postcards ) were enough "proof" to make any silly claim fail completely.....

I also wish there was an " if any " feature here as well.... it would save me time in many games.....

I disagree. I never quit my games and I am always finding a stalemate. Famous grandmaster marshall was known for playing til the ending and finding several stalemates against even the best players in the world.

And if you know your gonna win the game, why not just quit. Unless your rating is more important than your precious time, in which case no solution will be found.

Complete non sense...

Like I said, It gets annoying but its not the end of the world. You just move on, eventually the game will end. But tell me where the harm is, in implementing a feature  that cuts that time in half? How is that a bad thing?

I play for fun, and that also means, to me, that I play to improve. Tell me whats the best and easiest way to know if you've improved or not? Rating.

Also, try to find a 1800 player to play with if your rating is 1300. Good luck with that, its not as easy as it seems. Rating matters, whatever if you care how high or low it is.

The only time I got to play people rated over 2000 was in team matches, witch is why I like them. They can<t choose who they play.

I have also thought many times that an "if any" feature would be good.  Thanks for, hopefully, bringing it to the attention of Chess.com staff.  Sure, one can always wait a bit longer to finish the game, but if you like and use the Conditonal Moves feature, why not make it a bit better if possible?

Suppose your opponent throws in a king check on your conditional move. Even if the king check loses the piece. You will have to start the conditional move process over after clearing the check. Not sure if it would work.

If a contradiction, autaumatically scrap the conditional move line, its not hard.

ForkU, that problem could easily solved by just elaborating on the condition:

"Any move --> Play X {Iff* X is a legal reply}"

"If X is not a legal reply, scrap the condition" [as Viau_A points out]

This formula should be applied strictly, i.e suppose my condition is "If Any move then Qxd5" ... and suppose my oppenant moves the d5 pawn. the condition should be scrapped since Qxd5 is not a legal move.

Another interesting addition to this would be a "any piece move condition"

i.e: "Any K-move then..." and in the case where there are two of the same peice (two knights/rooks) we, when setting up the condition would write whether we refer to a specific rook ("If Rg1 any then...") or both Rooks (If Rg1 xor** Ra8 any then...." 

We could set this up for multiple peices: ("If Q-move/R-move/Na1 move any then..."

If we set up such a condition in a position that also had Knight, a bishop, king and a few pawns on the board then moving one of these peices would not satisfy our condtional move (thus scrapped), but should he/she move the a1 knight, Queen or Rook it is triggered.

.

* that wasnt a typo in case anyone was wondering. iff means "If and only if"

** again, not a typo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_or

But you do have a typo. You misspelled "piece".

I call this squirming.  In that situation I don't care coz no amount of squirming is going to stop me winning.  I actually take some satisfaction from it.   

I wanted to write: "Yes please, I also want this feature." Then I saw the date, over 11 years ago. Sad, that it's still not implemented...