(Note: There is exactly one correct answer to this question. Do you know what it is?)
You are going to play two simultaneous games of chess. The opponents can be anyone you want - the same person, different people, computers, any level of difficulty you want, and you could be any level of chess player from “knows the rules” to “has appeared on the front page of the paper for defeating a supercomputer”.
The trick is this: you are going to 100% guarantee that either you will win exactly one of the games and lose the other one, or that you will stalemate them both.
You play Game 1 as black, Game 2 as white. The moves go:
A. Game 1 opponent moves.
B. You move white on Game 2, duplicating the move made in A.
C. Game 2 opponent moves.
D. You move black on Game 1, duplicating the move made in C.
Repeat the steps, you’ll get two identical games. Either black wins both games, white wins both games, or both games stalemate.
Sorry, DRY, that usually happens to me, too, so I gotta take 'em when I can get 'em. It helps when you spend way too much time on the board, as well, like me.
I’ve played chess with a couple of people on the board–Libertarian and dragonfly98. I’m 1-1 with dragonfly, and 0-2 with Lib (Lib and I played another game which was aborted, but I’m fairly confident I would have lost that one, too ;)). I like to think I’m an above average player, but I’m not ranked, and I’ve played enough different people who can kick my ass consistently to know that I have a lot to work on in my game to be really good. Opal has a chess board on her site for Dopers to use.
BTW, isn’t Sting going to play Kasparov (I think–some grand master, anyway) soon? What the hell is he thinking? That he actually has a chance?
Small point: “stalemate” is a special kind of draw, and would be unlikely to occur in your problem. Stalemate is where the player whose turn it is in not in check, but cannot make a move. When playing a won endgame with a skillful opponent, you need to watch for stalemate if you don’t want to very frustrated (it’s worse than losing). Most draws are due to lack of 'mating material.
I did this when I had two very different computers in college (an old CPM machine and a TI minicomputer). I can’t recall which one won more, but I do recall that sometimes one would start making stupid moves which the other one capitalized on immediately.
Oh, I didn’t realize that draw and stalemate were different. I guess that means that we have to add two caveats to the statement: never resign (unless your opponent resigns first;) and never accept or offer a draw.
It’s been a loooong time since I’ve played, only because I can’t find opponents. Love the game. Anyone wanna play at Opal’s? Email me or post here if you do…
I think matt_mcl that you just have to replace the word “stalemate” with “draw”. There are other ways aside from stalemate and agreement to draw (triple repetition of position, 50 moves without a piece being taken). Your Op would work fine with “draw”… I think.
How about this… the opponant I want is Gary Kasparov… I will 100% guarantee that I will lose both games… I don’t even need that fancy trickery of matching moves.
You select black for one game and white for the other. You match the moves of the best player against you in the gave with the worst plater and play your best with the best player ending in a loss or draw. Did I miss something.
First off, I don’t have any cites for this. That being said, I heard (probably read) somewhere that a famous chess guy (Kasparov?) was challenged by a couple guys who planned to use this trick on him. He managed to beat them both, IIRC, by making what seemed to be a very stupid move that the guy playing him on the other board thought was so stupid that he made a different move. This screwed everything up and confused the two guys and then they didn’t stand a chance. IIRC. I hope that is readable. I know what I mean, if you don’t, ask me to clarify.
In network security, there is an attack known as the “man in the middle” attack. When the attack is described, this dual-chess technique is commonly given as an analogy.
There are 92 solutions?? It took me over 10 minutes to find just one!
Granted, that board was really making me dizzy, trying to figure out which boxes were pushed and which weren’t at 0345 in the morning…
Oh, and the one I got was 46152837.
I kept wanting to make it some repeated offset, which took me longer. Stupid brain refused to reshuffle things when it got stuck down a tree.
It’s possible to place those 8 Queens on the board in DippyMonger’s problem without any Queen on either of the two major diagonals. Not quite as easy, but all it takes is a little persistence. Or 60 minutes with a programming language.
