Is there a balanced chess system where players of unknown skill can have an equal chance of winning?
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Is there a chess system where you can make players of differing skill levels compete against each other with an equal chance to win without using different chess variations?
This system should give good players and bad players a level playing field where both of them can win.
chess-variants
New contributor
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Is there a chess system where you can make players of differing skill levels compete against each other with an equal chance to win without using different chess variations?
This system should give good players and bad players a level playing field where both of them can win.
chess-variants
New contributor
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
up vote
10
down vote
favorite
Is there a chess system where you can make players of differing skill levels compete against each other with an equal chance to win without using different chess variations?
This system should give good players and bad players a level playing field where both of them can win.
chess-variants
New contributor
Is there a chess system where you can make players of differing skill levels compete against each other with an equal chance to win without using different chess variations?
This system should give good players and bad players a level playing field where both of them can win.
chess-variants
chess-variants
New contributor
New contributor
edited 15 hours ago
itub
3,3831826
3,3831826
New contributor
asked 16 hours ago
Amit TPB
543
543
New contributor
New contributor
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago
add a comment |
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
Yes.
The way I've done this in the past is to play a series of games with clocks starting with 10 minutes each on the clocks and then the rule for subsequent games that the winner of the previous game gets one minute less and the loser one minute more. This quickly stabilizes at a level where both players have good chances of winning.
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
-2
down vote
Re-adding disclaimer as question edit was removed:
I'm answering meaningful version about different levels as there cannot exist equal 50/50 chance for unknown skill; it can be achieved theoretically, but than it would not be chess anymore - 2 color dice can be thrown with 50/50 chance, but in chess you cant make situation where newborn kid not knowing rules can have 50/50 chance Vs GM; even person just learned rules - you would need to use the method from @Brian Towers answer tweaking by second not minute to reach somewhat equal chance of GM mating or losing on time.
But...
Yes there is: It's handicap system - there are two main types of handicaps: time and material(as correctly pointed out in comments - material would take it out of current FIDE rules as chess variations where removed from their handbook few years ago).
for time typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both but 1 min shift for level (levels typically split around 2000 points each or by titles sometimes). for example 2 players with ~1800 rating would play in that tournament 5 min/game each; 2000 Vs 1800 would play 4 Vs 6 min 2200 Vs 1800 would have 3 Vs 7 2400 Vs 1800 would have 2 Vs 8 2600+ Vs 1800 would have 1 Vs 9 min; also 2600 Vs 2400 would play 4 Vs 6 min.
Also you can have material handicaps when someone starts a game missing some pawn or piece.
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
Yes.
The way I've done this in the past is to play a series of games with clocks starting with 10 minutes each on the clocks and then the rule for subsequent games that the winner of the previous game gets one minute less and the loser one minute more. This quickly stabilizes at a level where both players have good chances of winning.
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
12
down vote
Yes.
The way I've done this in the past is to play a series of games with clocks starting with 10 minutes each on the clocks and then the rule for subsequent games that the winner of the previous game gets one minute less and the loser one minute more. This quickly stabilizes at a level where both players have good chances of winning.
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
12
down vote
up vote
12
down vote
Yes.
The way I've done this in the past is to play a series of games with clocks starting with 10 minutes each on the clocks and then the rule for subsequent games that the winner of the previous game gets one minute less and the loser one minute more. This quickly stabilizes at a level where both players have good chances of winning.
Yes.
The way I've done this in the past is to play a series of games with clocks starting with 10 minutes each on the clocks and then the rule for subsequent games that the winner of the previous game gets one minute less and the loser one minute more. This quickly stabilizes at a level where both players have good chances of winning.
answered 14 hours ago
Brian Towers
12.7k31960
12.7k31960
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
6
6
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
@Drako after 10 games each will win 50% of the games.
– DonQuiKong
12 hours ago
7
7
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
@Drako: This is a question about the ordinary world, not programming or pure mathematics; “players of unknown skill” can reasonably be understood as assuming that the players at least know the rules and aren’t newborn babies.
– Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
12 hours ago
2
2
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
Having seen some people play 1 minute games; and other new players ... There are definitely combinations for whom this wouldn't work! (though a good suggestion none the less)
– UKMonkey
12 hours ago
2
2
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
Yeah, if the stronger player is much stronger then no time imbalance will do the trick. They'll just devise a strategy for every possible move while the opponent is thinking about it.
– leftaroundabout
10 hours ago
2
2
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
@leftaroundabout Yep. You can think on your opponent's time and it's sufficient to devise a counter for just a few of the likely best moves. Any other move will be sufficiently sub-par that a quick response will still let the stronger player win.
– David Schwartz
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
-2
down vote
Re-adding disclaimer as question edit was removed:
I'm answering meaningful version about different levels as there cannot exist equal 50/50 chance for unknown skill; it can be achieved theoretically, but than it would not be chess anymore - 2 color dice can be thrown with 50/50 chance, but in chess you cant make situation where newborn kid not knowing rules can have 50/50 chance Vs GM; even person just learned rules - you would need to use the method from @Brian Towers answer tweaking by second not minute to reach somewhat equal chance of GM mating or losing on time.
But...
Yes there is: It's handicap system - there are two main types of handicaps: time and material(as correctly pointed out in comments - material would take it out of current FIDE rules as chess variations where removed from their handbook few years ago).
for time typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both but 1 min shift for level (levels typically split around 2000 points each or by titles sometimes). for example 2 players with ~1800 rating would play in that tournament 5 min/game each; 2000 Vs 1800 would play 4 Vs 6 min 2200 Vs 1800 would have 3 Vs 7 2400 Vs 1800 would have 2 Vs 8 2600+ Vs 1800 would have 1 Vs 9 min; also 2600 Vs 2400 would play 4 Vs 6 min.
Also you can have material handicaps when someone starts a game missing some pawn or piece.
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
Re-adding disclaimer as question edit was removed:
I'm answering meaningful version about different levels as there cannot exist equal 50/50 chance for unknown skill; it can be achieved theoretically, but than it would not be chess anymore - 2 color dice can be thrown with 50/50 chance, but in chess you cant make situation where newborn kid not knowing rules can have 50/50 chance Vs GM; even person just learned rules - you would need to use the method from @Brian Towers answer tweaking by second not minute to reach somewhat equal chance of GM mating or losing on time.
But...
Yes there is: It's handicap system - there are two main types of handicaps: time and material(as correctly pointed out in comments - material would take it out of current FIDE rules as chess variations where removed from their handbook few years ago).
for time typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both but 1 min shift for level (levels typically split around 2000 points each or by titles sometimes). for example 2 players with ~1800 rating would play in that tournament 5 min/game each; 2000 Vs 1800 would play 4 Vs 6 min 2200 Vs 1800 would have 3 Vs 7 2400 Vs 1800 would have 2 Vs 8 2600+ Vs 1800 would have 1 Vs 9 min; also 2600 Vs 2400 would play 4 Vs 6 min.
Also you can have material handicaps when someone starts a game missing some pawn or piece.
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
up vote
-2
down vote
Re-adding disclaimer as question edit was removed:
I'm answering meaningful version about different levels as there cannot exist equal 50/50 chance for unknown skill; it can be achieved theoretically, but than it would not be chess anymore - 2 color dice can be thrown with 50/50 chance, but in chess you cant make situation where newborn kid not knowing rules can have 50/50 chance Vs GM; even person just learned rules - you would need to use the method from @Brian Towers answer tweaking by second not minute to reach somewhat equal chance of GM mating or losing on time.
But...
Yes there is: It's handicap system - there are two main types of handicaps: time and material(as correctly pointed out in comments - material would take it out of current FIDE rules as chess variations where removed from their handbook few years ago).
for time typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both but 1 min shift for level (levels typically split around 2000 points each or by titles sometimes). for example 2 players with ~1800 rating would play in that tournament 5 min/game each; 2000 Vs 1800 would play 4 Vs 6 min 2200 Vs 1800 would have 3 Vs 7 2400 Vs 1800 would have 2 Vs 8 2600+ Vs 1800 would have 1 Vs 9 min; also 2600 Vs 2400 would play 4 Vs 6 min.
Also you can have material handicaps when someone starts a game missing some pawn or piece.
Re-adding disclaimer as question edit was removed:
I'm answering meaningful version about different levels as there cannot exist equal 50/50 chance for unknown skill; it can be achieved theoretically, but than it would not be chess anymore - 2 color dice can be thrown with 50/50 chance, but in chess you cant make situation where newborn kid not knowing rules can have 50/50 chance Vs GM; even person just learned rules - you would need to use the method from @Brian Towers answer tweaking by second not minute to reach somewhat equal chance of GM mating or losing on time.
But...
Yes there is: It's handicap system - there are two main types of handicaps: time and material(as correctly pointed out in comments - material would take it out of current FIDE rules as chess variations where removed from their handbook few years ago).
for time typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both but 1 min shift for level (levels typically split around 2000 points each or by titles sometimes). for example 2 players with ~1800 rating would play in that tournament 5 min/game each; 2000 Vs 1800 would play 4 Vs 6 min 2200 Vs 1800 would have 3 Vs 7 2400 Vs 1800 would have 2 Vs 8 2600+ Vs 1800 would have 1 Vs 9 min; also 2600 Vs 2400 would play 4 Vs 6 min.
Also you can have material handicaps when someone starts a game missing some pawn or piece.
edited 12 hours ago
answered 14 hours ago
Drako
2207
2207
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
add a comment |
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
3
3
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
You haven't answered the question. Two players with 1800 strength are not players of unknown skill. Material handicaps are variants because article 2.3 of the FIDE Laws of Chess is not obeyed.
– Brian Towers
14 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers I did not notice that my fix applied to question is not visible to everyone and already fixed my answer - initial my answer had disclaimer that I answered meaningful edition of Q. because system for unknown skill can't exist in reality - theoretically you just make game where winning chance is 50/50 for any skill and in that game unknown skill level will have equal chance but that game is not chess. You can throw dice with 2 colors with equal chance for baby, newbie and adult, pro. So the question makes sense only when edited for different not unknown skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
@BrianTowers Your answer partially is closer as it works ok for relatively close strength opponents then you can by using this system find handicap level and actually still use what I have written or it will not help when one player is GM and another does not know how chess pieces are moved(unknown skill can be "zero" too!) so your answer is only some mitigation for cases when both players have at least some skill level.
– Drako
13 hours ago
1
1
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
"typical tournaments are 10 min per game for both" If your idea of "typical" is "blitz", maybe...
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
Could you try to add some paragraph breaks to your wall of text? That makes it easier to read.
– Paŭlo Ebermann
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Amit TPB is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Amit TPB is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Amit TPB is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Amit TPB is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f22975%2fis-there-a-balanced-chess-system-where-players-of-unknown-skill-can-have-an-equa%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
unedited question makes no sense. Should change unknown to different. Edit already suggested.
– Drako
13 hours ago