[Event "Spoke too soon"]
[Site "SchemingMind.com"]
[Date "2004.01.09"]
[Round "-"]
[White "spoke"]
[Black "Austin Lockwood"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B00f"]
[WhiteCountry "GER"]
[BlackCountry "ENG"]
[WhiteElo "1725"]
[WhiteRD "120"]
[BlackElo "1643"]
[BlackRD "72"]
[GameID "737"]

1. e4
{
spoke: Hello Austin, nice to meet you at the board!
}
1... b6 2. d4
{
spoke: most games here are private single games, that's okay - but the one or other event would be nice; is there another event on your schedule, in Standard chess?
}
2... Bb7
{
Austin Lockwood: I don't have anything planned, but I'm open to suggestions... could be team matches, tournaments (knockout, round robin, swiss), anything really.
}
3. Nc3
{
spoke: Okay, then i will suggest an event :-) A mixture between knockout and swiss. Advantage: Any number of participants is possible, and unreliable players will drop out. I would be ready to set up a tournament table and the pairings. An example you can see under  http://www.freechess.de/turnier/dat/0700.htm  For SchemingMind the rules could be slightly modified. Here we could name it 'Dropout Tournament'
}
3... Nf6
{
Austin Lockwood: Looks interesting - why don't you suggest it in the forums? that way we can see how many players might want to take part.
}
{
Austin Lockwood: I can probably set up a page to draw the tables, etc. (e.g. the Atherton page pulls data directly from the database - I don't have to update it manually)
}
4. Bd3
{
spoke: yes the forum is better, but wanted your okay before. i will start a thread next week, cause i'm absent over the weekend. Technical details could be discussed better by email, later.
}
4... e6
{
Austin Lockwood: OK - you'll have to explain to me how this format works (but leave it for the forum discussion or you'll have to explain it twice!)
}
{
Austin Lockwood: Reliable players... hmmm... I've made a few posts in the chess newsgroups recently and it does seem to attract a few players, but most of them seem to make a few moves and then vanish again.  The most 'reliable' players do seem to be people that are invited to the site by their friends.
}
5. Nge2
{
spoke: With copy/paste it's only once :) therefore i'll type some words for you in advance: in each round players have 2 games with different opponents (and colour of pieces). For a win/draw/loss they get 0/1/3 (Malus-)points, with 6 points or more you're out (that's the knockout part). In the next round(s) players with the same score are paired (randomly) against each other (this is similar to Swiss). About reliable players: meanwhile there are many sites where you can play, if announced in ng's people are often just curious. Therefore, if you will increase the number of players in some extend, it's better to ask all current players to invite 2 or 3 chessfriends.
}
5... c5
{
Austin Lockwood: My plan is to close the site to new members once we start to get towards a reasonable server load.  But before that I would like to attract an interesting group of people who enjoy playing here.  My idea is that inactive players would eventually lose their places, and new players would have to wait for a place - I think the proportion of 'unreliable' players would diminish under this system (and the cost of running the site would remain stable!)
}
6. O-O
{
spoke: yes, a 'warning message' after 2 or 3  months, and removal after another month would help. To protect players with tempolarly breaks you can add a spot 'absence' in the player profiles (also opponents will then know, that this chessfriend is away).
}
6... Bd6
{
Austin Lockwood: I already do that in a way - if you don't move for three months (or one month for players who have never moved), your account is marked as 'inactive' and your name doesn't show up in the players list.  I don't actually delete accounts - if you sign on again after the three months you are marked as 'active' again (but when I have a waiting list, you will have to go to the back of the queue)
}
7. e5
{
spoke: how many active members do you think are the limit here?
}
7... Nd5
{
Austin Lockwood: Heh heh - the *big* question!  based on extrapolating current usage, I think probably between 250-400 before I have to work out a way of getting money back (which I don't really want to do).  It is quite nice being small though, a bit like a real chess club where you get to know everybody ;-)
}
8. Nxd5
{
spoke: I agree: smaller is better (i mentioned iecc in the game with phil: it was founded as 'small and friendly', derived from iecg. In the beginning it was as familiar as here, but noadays x-thousand players are playing their _silent_ games there, don't like it any more). If all are _active_ I think 100 is a good number for a club, where you have the chance to play anybody at least once.
}
{
spoke: .. i meant 100 as lower limit, and your 250 (to 400?) is upper l.
}
8... c4
{
Austin Lockwood: Yes, I'm basing that upper limit on a 10GB/month hosting plan (which is about the maximum I'm prepared to contemplate).  At present bandwith is around 1GB/month for 80 players but I wouldn't really want to go above 5GB (because that 10GB doesn't include emails, backups, etc. and also to leave some flexibility) - that's how I arrived at the 400 figure.  However as I mentioned above, I forsee the concentration of active players to increase, so I'd think it would be somewhat less than 400 (say 250).  At the moment the server is in my garage and uses my adsl connexion, but I'm sure my ISP won't allow that to go on for much longer!
}
9. Bxc4
{
spoke: not so many numbers please, have only an idea what 250 people are :)  - crazy position, is this still 'book' or already 'bug'? Don't know Owen.
}
9... exd5
{
Austin Lockwood: OK - no more numbers! - 250 is the limit ;-) I think we left Owen behind a few moves ago!
}
10. Bb3
{
spoke: I've never played this opening before, perhaos in England it's more popular because of Miles.
}
10... Be7
{
Austin Lockwood: Hmmm... I don't think it is popular - I just like to start with something different sometimes! - doesn't seem to have done me much good here though :-[
}
{
Philip: i think if we could work out a way to mix mornington crescent with chess openings we could be on to something. that said i am just here because spoke spoke to me to come visit here. after seeing all the numbers in the comments i got goggle eyed so don't ask me to think this fine bitter cold day. we're getting quite the snap of arctic air. the newspeople are loving telling us all day that the morning's 22 (F) was to be the day's high and that it will continue to drop for the next few days. i say blame it on canada, they always send us the cold air from the arctic. now if they only had more greenhouse gases up there we'd be getting far milder winters. ok that's my humorous rant for the day. we now return to your previously arranged chess match, already in progress...
}
11. Bf4
{
spoke: yes, i have material advantage, will see if that's enough (it's difficult with all the scrolling on the left side of the screen :-) @Philip: what about making comments mandatory in a new CVariant, and if a player can answer with 'MC' he can make an extra move :-))
}
{
spoke: Before i post something about a new event: do you think a multi-round makes sense without any restriction of refl.time? If i see Match 1 in the FRC-KO i doubt. If we start an event as above mentioned i would suggest, that the TD can add a 'first warning' as comment to the game, and then within a few days a move has to be made. After 2nd 10day-delay the game can be forfeited at once.
}
11... O-O
{
Austin Lockwood: I think we may set the record for the longest scrolling annotations in this game ;-) I agree about the timeouts for multi-round games - the current arrangements are fine for informal games, or for one round tournaments/matches, but we need to find an alternative for tournaments where you can't start the second round until the first is finished.
}
12. Rc1
{
spoke: If started a thread about new event in the forum. / let's see which game needs more scrolling at the end the one with Philip, or this one ;-))
}
12... d6
{
Austin Lockwood: I've replied to your thread - and added an alternative suggestion for game times ;-)
}
13. exd6
{
spoke: about the thread in the forum: at first i didn't want to answer at once, to allow others also a post; but now I#ve made another suggestion about refl. time.
}
{
spoke: A feature 'preview post' would be nice in the forum :)
}
13... Bxd6
{
Austin Lockwood: OK, OK... I'll add it to my todo list (after private messaging and tournament pages)
}
14. c3
{
spoke: The ":)" in my green comment meant, that it isn't that urgent :)  About another remark in the forum: sure, that you mustn't pay for it, if i should do such a little task as TD :) vice versa, i'ld rather do such a little job than paying for the service. Similar at freechess: there as TD i have a live-long 'gold account' :) 
}
14... Re8
{
Austin Lockwood: Heh heh, I know you don't mind doing it, I was just joking ;-)
}
{
Austin Lockwood: Will you decide the first round pairings at random, or will it be based on ratings?
}
15. Re1
{
spoke: i know that, too
}
15... Nc6 16. Bxd6
{
spoke: Random, I'm using Excel for that, assigning a random no to each participant, then sort by number. Because there will also be new players w/o rating.
}
16... Qxd6
{
Austin Lockwood: OK - I was going to suggest arranging the first round after the next ratings calculation (1st Feb), but I guess it doesn't really matter then
}
17. Qd2
{
spoke: with 'random' we could start a little earlier. How long do you think the signup period should be? are 2 weeks enough?
}
17... Re7
{
Austin Lockwood: Should be long enough.  I've also started a thread in the forums about time controls - a few people who don't like the relaxed approach have emailed me privately and I think it is time we had the option of stricter time controls for all games.
}
18. Nf4
{
spoke: i've seen that thread, i prefer/suggest a mode like 'Fischer clock', will add a post later
}
18... Rae8 19. Rxe7 Nxe7 20. Re1 Qd7 21. Qe3
{
spoke: hope you will now not change the title of this game, into 'spoke to often' :)
}
21... Ba6
{
Austin Lockwood: ;-)
}
22. Nxd5
{
spoke: re: refl. time & bus rides, I wanted to say that you should take some time, to find a solution similar to the suggested mode, which is technical easy to apply
}
22... Kf8
{
Austin Lockwood: Yes I know ;-) I'm thinking about it right now...
}
23. Nxe7
{
spoke: bus-philosophy ;-))
}
23... Rxe7 24. Qxe7+ Qxe7 25. Rxe7 Kxe7 26. f4 f5
{
Austin Lockwood: How about the 'token' idea? (see forum)
}
27. Kf2
{
spoke: i had already replied, perhaps too fast, as i understood these 'tokens' as 'adding time game by game, which costs a token each'?? But in fact: wouldn't this mean 'adding time to one's games oneself'? If so, this should be done for all ongoing games parallel, you can't have holidays in a part of the games. 
}
{
spoke: in that sense i added a simpler formula in the forum. In fact it wouldn't make a difference, if a player announces his holiday in his profile, or if he adds the time directly to his watches
}
27... Bd3
{
Austin Lockwood: I must have been writing at the same time as you again, but I think we are both thinking the same thing!
}
28. Ke3
{
spoke: yes!! :)
}
28... Be4
{
Austin Lockwood: Well that was easier than going on a bus to think! - What problem will we solve next?
}
29. g4
{
spoke: Let's have a break, and chat about something else :)
Emmh .. but, if needed, I have a little other problem: I have no homepage, and so no picture where I have a link on. Could i send you a picture in .jpg-format, that you could upload to my profile? If so, is the size of the file limited?
}
29... h6
{
Austin Lockwood: Sure, no problem - my email address is austin@schemingmind.com there are no restrictions on file size (it doesn't use my bandwidth, so I don't care!) 181x198px seems to fit the frame quite neatly - in IE at least (see my picture)
}
30. h4
{
spoke: okay, I#ve brought a picture to the right size and emailed it to you - thanks!
}
30... a5
{
Austin Lockwood: OK - done.
}
31. g5
{
spoke: okay, fine :)
}
31... Kd6
{
Austin Lockwood: Do you follow VfB Stuttgart?
}
32. Bc4
{
spoke: sometimes i watch football in TV, also VfB, but I'm not a special fan of this club - but since Magath is their coach they have improved a lot, sympatic team. I'm more interested in  cycling :)
}
32... a4
{
Austin Lockwood: I had the chance to see VfB a few months ago when they played in Manchester, but unfortunately I couldn't get out that night
}
33. Bd3
{
spoke: have seen both games ManU-VfB in TV / in the dropout we've 16 players up to now, from now on it's fine, and the more the better :)
}
33... Bxd3
{
Austin Lockwood: Excellent - I look forward to it starting! - hopefully we can still get a few more players
}
34. Kxd3 hxg5 35. hxg5
{
spoke: may be the one or other 'external' player will join, i've invited some chessfriends
}
35... Kc6
{
Austin Lockwood: Yes, I noticed a new player joined this morning
}
36. c4
{
spoke: Oh, fine, that's my dearest chessfriends, we've met in iecc, and already visted each other last year :)
}
36... g6
{
Austin Lockwood: and another - it's getting busy in here!
}
37. b4
{
spoke: my newest chessfriend, i've met him as busy player this morning on another site :) - my pawns will also become busy, with 2P+ this endgame should be clear now
}
37... axb3
{
Austin Lockwood: Yes, you have an unbeatable pawn advantage now - I'm playing on for the conversation ;-)
}
38. axb3
{
spoke: yes the conversation is the main thing here, taking that into account the game was relatively good.
}
38... Kd6
{
Austin Lockwood: You mean it wouldn't have been good without the conversation!!?
}
39. b4
{
spoke: no, i mean i'ld already played some games here that were easier to win :) // in the thread about reflection time i've made a suggestion about accept/modify/decline a challenge, what do you think about that?
}
39... Kd7
{
Austin Lockwood: Hmmm... Not sure how it would work.  I think I prefer the option of letting players specify which games they will accept in their profiles (like I do with chess variants) - in this way you can only be challenged to a game with time controls that suit you.  (my thoughts are probably driven more by programming complexity than by usability though!)  I'm working on the time control routines today - I should have it finished by the time your tourney starts.
}
40. d5
{
spoke: Okay, via preferences the options for a challenge can also be clarified, in advance of a challenge players could also talk (and agree) about the options // time controls: would be find, if we can use it in the tourney, but take your time, I'm also ready to do that 'manualy'. In short i'll write down some rules for the tourney, which then could be implemented in the section Community/Events, that's better than having the rules somewhere in the Forum.
}
40... Kd6
{
Austin Lockwood: I'm making good progress (at the expense of my real job!) - I expect to upload the new code by the end of this week - If you email me your rules when you are ready I'll put them up on the site somewhere.
}
41. Kd4
{
spoke: okay, will send it as plain text in the body of an email
}
41... Kd7
{
Austin Lockwood: How about this... http://www.lockwood.me.uk/game.html - the links don't do anything, it's just a static page to get an idea what it might look like when it's finished - also note the private messages link on the left :-)
}
42. c5
{
spoke: yes, that looks fine!! To see, how it looks like on other servers here's a link to one of my games (I'm 'ventoux' there): http://www.net-chess.com/viewgame.cgi?p1=g1073487927   - here also the remaining time is displayed below the players names.  What's the smallest time increment you'll count and store, seconds? For the display you could then use the format days/hours/minutes/seconds for shorter times, and above lets say 2 days,  d+h is enough.
}
42... bxc5+
{
Austin Lockwood: I think d/h/m/s is a bit obscessional - how about d+h for >24h and h+m for <24h
}
43. bxc5
{
spoke: yes okay, displaying seconds would be only good for online-chess
}
43... Kc7
{
Austin Lockwood: Did you get the names for the time limits from anywhere (blitz, fast, standard leisure)? - I don't want anyone to think we are taking their ideas if those four titles are used on another server!
}
44. Ke5
{
spoke: these names came in my mind when i wrote it, you may exclusively use it :)
}
{
spoke: names on another site for 3 different speeds are 'greyhound, rabbit, turtle' :) .. but the difference between r and t is much bigger than btw g and r
}
{
spoke: Thanks, Austin - yes you can start a 2nd game, Austin-spoke
}
{
Game Over: OK - we'll stick with your names.  I'll start another game later today
}
1-0

