PDA

View Full Version : What odds?



Basil
22-04-2007, 11:13 PM
Flicking through 'REVIEW Jan-Dec 1945' bound compilation over the last few nights!!! (American monthly chess publication).

A 'Letter To The Editor' suggested odds (pawn, knight etc.) for postal players of different ratings groups playing against each other. Two things:

1) Invite comments on what suitable odds would be (say pawn for 300 ratings points)
2) Any interest from up or downstream players playing in an 'odds' tournament. Have to be better than this freestyle crapish that Garvo has dreamed up! ;)

Basil
22-04-2007, 11:17 PM
My initial thought is that a pawn for 250 points seems about right. Knight for 500 points might be a fraction generous to the weaker player.

Would very much like to hear from stronger players. Is there an unofficial scale that is already accepted?

The higher the ratings of the two players, the better the standard odds are for the weaker player (ratio of odds to rating thing). Perhaps a metric is called for :uhoh:

Kevin Bonham
22-04-2007, 11:27 PM
HICC had a novelty blitz tournament with odds of pawn per 100 points, rounded down and capped at Queen odds. Perhaps because it was blitz, this had only some effect and the high-rated players still wound up near the top.

You also have to deal with issues like "which pawn"? Starting the game without one's QNP or KBP is not without its advantages!

Desmond
23-04-2007, 10:28 AM
I think traditionally the person giving odds takes White. The advantage of having a pawn removed (i.e. lead in development / open lines) might be less marked if one had to play Black.

I have also heard of the f-pawn + 2 odds. i.e. The higher rated player gets his f-pawn removed, has to play Black, and White gets to make the first 2 moves.

Aaron Guthrie
23-04-2007, 10:56 AM
I thought it was pawn and move, i.e. if pawn odds it is very rare to get white. But if piece then you get white.

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2007, 06:11 PM
My initial thought is that a pawn for 250 points seems about right. Knight for 500 points might be a fraction generous to the weaker player.

Would very much like to hear from stronger players. Is there an unofficial scale that is already accepted?

The higher the ratings of the two players, the better the standard odds are for the weaker player (ratio of odds to rating thing). Perhaps a metric is called for :uhoh:

To combine your two points, it would be necessary to expand the rating difference per unit of material as the players' rating increased. An FM would have a lot more chance of swindling an 1800 player at N odds (although still slim) than Kasparov would have of swindling an FM. And a 1300 player might lose a lot to an 1800, because the technique for realising an advantage is not so well developed.

Capablanca-Fan
23-04-2007, 06:12 PM
If you want to see some well played games at odds, check out Reinfeld's book of Tarrasch's best games.

Capablanca-Fan
29-04-2007, 10:03 AM
In March 1941, a year before he died, Capablanca gave pawn and move to three leading Cuban players, two games each, one at a time, and was undefeated. He scored 2-0 v J. Fernández León, 1.5-0.5 v R. Blanco, 1-1 v R. Romero. The scores are in Edward Winter's book on Capablanca.

Desmond
06-06-2007, 07:16 PM
I recently blundered a piece cold on about move 8 :doh: against an opponent rated I think 13xx (some 500 pts below myself) and managed to win the game. I'll post the game if I can find it and anyone's interested.

Aaron Guthrie
06-06-2007, 07:37 PM
I recently blundered a piece cold on about move 8 :doh: against an opponent rated I think 13xx (some 500 pts below myself) and managed to win the game. I'll post the game if I can find it and anyone's interested.The old accidental odds trick. It might help people think about appropriate odds, so I say post it if you can be bothered. And I am vaguely interested in seeing it too :)

Rincewind
06-06-2007, 09:36 PM
I recently blundered a piece cold on about move 8 :doh: against an opponent rated I think 13xx (some 500 pts below myself) and managed to win the game. I'll post the game if I can find it and anyone's interested.

I did a similar thing in a correspondence game.

Capablanca-Fan
06-06-2007, 11:42 PM
In a recent blindfold simul I blundered a Q by transposing moves. Board 4 went 1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 Bf5 4. Bxc4;
Board 8: 1. Nf3 d6 2. e4 b6 3. d4 Bg4. Somehow I transposed that to the moves on Board 4, where ...Bg4 allows Ne5! and if Bxd1 Bxf7#. But duh, on Board 8, 4. Ne5 Bxd1 5 Bxf7# "Not possible". Oops. Gotta make the best of it, so 5. Bb5+ c6 6. Nxc6 Qc7 7. Nxb8+ Kd8 8. Nc6+ and Kd1 with some compensation and chances for Black to go wrong anyway. He let me surround his K eventually.

Rincewind
07-06-2007, 12:21 AM
The old accidental odds trick. It might help people think about appropriate odds, so I say post it if you can be bothered. And I am vaguely interested in seeing it too :)

If your interested here is mine from a correspondence game. Blacks move 7...Ba6 was bad but white's move 12.o-o-o was worse.

[Date "1993"]
[White "Someone else"]
[Black "Rincewind"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1080"] (These are CCLA ratings from the time)
[BlackElo "1175"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.c5 b6 5.cxb6 axb6 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bd2 Ba6 8.Qa4+ Nbd7 9.Qxb4 c5 10.dxc5 bxc5 11.Qh4 O-O 12.O-O-O Qb6 13.Na4 Qb7 14.g3 Rfb8 15.Bf4 Rc8 16.b3 c4 17.Kb2 cxb3 18.axb3 Bc4 19.Kc3 Bxb3+ 20.Kd2 Qb4+ 0-1

Aaron Guthrie
07-06-2007, 12:33 AM
The whole surviving Black army vs the king and a knight on the rim!

pax
07-06-2007, 10:26 AM
I recently blundered a piece cold on about move 8 :doh: against an opponent rated I think 13xx (some 500 pts below myself) and managed to win the game. I'll post the game if I can find it and anyone's interested.

I have actually done this against players who were objectively stronger than me. Now obviously, they didn't play well with the extra piece - but the other factor was that it allowed me to play an attacking game with abandon, which is outside my normal style. They were quite exhilharating games, but I fear the moves have been lost to the mists of time.

MichaelBaron
07-06-2007, 04:55 PM
My initial thought is that a pawn for 250 points seems about right. Knight for 500 points might be a fraction generous to the weaker player.

Would very much like to hear from stronger players. Is there an unofficial scale that is already accepted?

The higher the ratings of the two players, the better the standard odds are for the weaker player (ratio of odds to rating thing). Perhaps a metric is called for :uhoh:

i think a pawn for 250 points is OK at a lower level. However, at a higher level it appears to be too much of a handicap.

I do not think i would enjoy playing someone like Hacche with a pawn handicap :( . Nor do i fancy my chances :doh:

Capablanca-Fan
08-06-2007, 04:10 AM
My initial thought is that a pawn for 250 points seems about right.

Although I wouldn't fancy my chances of giving a P to a ~2000 player, while I think my chances would be good against a 2500 player giving me those odds.


Knight for 500 points might be a fraction generous to the weaker player.

That's what I think too. I don't think I'd have much chance at all against a 1700-1800 player at knight odds, and I'm pretty sure that Kasparov couldn't give me those odds. FWIW I think I'd have no chance at all giving you R odds.

But Drug's experience at blitz might cause some revision of that.


Would very much like to hear from stronger players. Is there an unofficial scale that is already accepted?

The higher the ratings of the two players, the better the standard odds are for the weaker player (ratio of odds to rating thing). Perhaps a metric is called for :uhoh:

Yes, the higher the level, the more the weaker player has the technique to exploit the material advantage. But from what Drug says, in Blitz a much weaker player is more likely to go wrong, so greater odds may be justified.

Desmond
13-06-2007, 06:24 PM
Boris v Another
90+30
[EventDate "2007.05.26"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Nc6 5. cxd5 exd5 6. e3 Be7 7. Qb3 Ne4 8.
Bxe7 Nxe7 9. Nf3 c6 10. Nxe4 dxe4 11. Ng5 Qa5+ 12. Qc3 Qxg5 13. O-O-O O-O 14.
h4 Qf6 15. Rd2 Be6 16. Kb1 Rfc8 17. h5 c5 18. Qa3 cxd4 19. exd4 e3 20. fxe3
Bf5+ 21. Bd3 Rc6 22. e4 Qg5 23. Rf2 Rac8 24. Rff1 Bg4 25. h6 g6 26. Qb3 Rf6 27.
Bc4 Be6 28. d5 b5 29. Bxb5 Bg4 30. Bc4 Qe5 31. Rxf6 Qxe4+ 32. Bd3 Qe5 33. Rhf1
Nf5 34. Qb7 Rf8 35. Rc6 Qxd5 36. Bc4 Qe4+ 37. Ka1 Nd6 38. Qc7 Nxc4 39. Rxc4 Qe6
40. Rfc1 Bf5 41. Rb4 Qe3 42. Rb8 Qxh6 43. Rxf8+ Qxf8 44. Rd1 Kg7 45. Qxa7 h5
46. Qd4+ Kh6 47. Qf6 Qc5 48. Qxf7 Qc2 49. Qf8+ Kg5 50. Qd8+ Kg4 51. Qd4+ Kg5
52. g3 Qe2 53. a4 Qf3 54. a5 Bg4 55. Qd5+ Qxd5 56. Rxd5+ Bf5 57. a6 Kg4 58. a7
1-0

Capablanca-Fan
16-06-2007, 10:36 PM
Boris v Another
90+30
[EventDate "2007.05.26"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Nc6 5. cxd5 exd5

Now 6. Bxf6 would force the ugly ... gxf6. One of the many problems is that they are less mobile, which would hinder Black's normal K-side counterplay against the minority attack.