Game Explorer feature request

jay wrote:

Yeah, I agree with you. I'm currently working on some other features/fixes, so when we've got time and if it seems doable, then I can see if I can script a fix for this.

 Great! thanks a lot

hicetnunc wrote: I second ozzie's request here. As a working tool, the Opening Explorer should correctly take into account all transpositions, whatever the (FEN) strings you -clever people- use to make it work

If you use a canonical form (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/eco-abandoned?page=2 , post#23) of FEN to coalesce transpositions, Game Explorer will potentially need to display several ECO tags/names. It already does something similar by listing Related Openings. What is the maximum number of names for a set of transposed positions, I wonder? Or does the ECO take this into account and avoid duplicate names?

I think there are no duplicate names in ECO tags, but ECO misses many transpositions.

I think that a "Flat FEN" could be added to the DB. It would be expressly for the purpose of ensuring that Games Explorer behaves "as expected" by a reasonable player. I don't think it's a good idea to actually recompute the FEN for the positions, just to have a second FEN-type value.

I got a laugh out of the above post which said that after 1.Nf3 e5 2.e4(?) that only one time did this occur and black won by playing 2. ...Nc6.

OK - why did white not capture on e5? Also, of course there is only one game there, because the position after e4 e5 Nf3, where white has made his last move e4, is only reached in one manner, and it is ridiculous for white to actually play 2.e4 as he did in that game.

But - in the "flat FEN" world, the position would still be considered identical to the more typical 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3