8 ms·

Real Time Chess – A physical chess board without the concept of turns

262 points by dschuessler 2y ago

vunderba 2y ago
There was a demo from around 5+ years ago of a experimental real-time Chess board which looked remarkably similar. Once a piece was moved, a visible circular timer with a duration proportional to the piece valuation would count down until they were allowed to move the piece again. I wish I could find the link but trying to search YT for relevant results older than a couple years is just trash.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- hnlmorg 2y ago
  Could it be the Kung Fu Chess games mentioned in the video?
mnky9800n 2y ago
Why is ass and anal bolded in the readme? The git blame says you did it. Haha.
- xg15 2y ago
  I think it's a nod to the controversy he alluded to in the previous sentences, which exposed some more unorthodox cheating strategies. You can read about it in the link.
- quuxplusone 2y ago
  https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/sport/hans-niemann-denies-sex-toys-cheating-chess-spt-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/sport/hans-niemann-denies-sex...
- iwontberude 2y ago
  I think the ass speaks for itself
- meowface 2y ago
  It refers to a player accused of cheating against Magnus Carlsen, with widespread speculation that the cheating might've been done using an anal vibrator. (There's zero evidence it actually was an anal device; no one knows how he might've cheated if he indeed cheated. It just became a big meme.)
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
    Hans Niemann almost certainly did not cheat against Carlsen. Carlsen just played that game rather poorly and ragequit the tournament because he's a baby who can't handle losing. I do think Niemann may have cheated in OTB chess before. But not at the Sinquefield Cup, I just don't see it. And the only evidence is insinuations from a sore loser who's well known for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get his way. The buttplug stuff was really just a joke from reddit, no one's seriously suggested anyone is actually cheating using a buttplug. Doesn't even make sense as a way of cheating, really. It would be extremely obvious.
    - olddustytrail 2y ago
      Hans Niemann almost certainly did cheat against Carlsen. Everyone who knows about chess found that game hugely suspicious (see Hikaru's comments on it). The idea that Carlsen can't stand losing is a theory from people who don't know about chess. His lose rate is about 15%. All GMs lose games all the time. It's keeping the win rate as high as possible that makes them the best. The notion that any GM would get so upset simply about losing a single game is just nonsense.
      - mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
        I've been playing tournament chess for 20 years. Not every game is created equal. Some losses are more upsetting than others. Carlsen has some narcissistic traits, which is unsurprising given that he's been showered in adulation from the chess world and general public since he was a small child(and this is common in these chess virtuosos. See Kasparov, Fischer, Kramnik, Nakamura). He might be able to handle losing to someone he considers his peer, but there are plenty of things about Niemann's personality rumours circulating about his online cheating during the game, and his rating at the time that made this loss particularly hard to handle. And GMs have had plenty of bad reactions to losses throughout the history of chess. It definitely happens. Chess is an emotionally taxing game. You spend many hours of exhausting effort at the board only to lose due to a momentary brainfart. It's infuriating. GMs are humans too. Hell, fairly recently there was an incident when GM Christopher Yoo punched a photographer after losing a game at a tournament in St Louis.
xg15 2y ago
> so this should be a pretty uncontroversial minor rules update My kind of humor. Always found it an interesting aspect of chess that the most "common sense" rules (Players take turns; no skipping; one move per turn) result in the most unintuitive outcomes and a massive increase in complexity: Suddenly you can reason about the pieces a player won't be able to move in a turn, you can double-bind players, you get draws where its provably impossible for any player to win, etc. (In that sense, chess is a bit like the IntercalScript language earlier today: All features are superficially reasonable and in the service of simplicity, yet result in the weirdest outcomes) Wouldn't all this be gone for chess without turns? Or would strategies become even more intricate, e.g. taking into account the minimum time you'd require to physically move a piece?
- pimlottc 2y ago
  > Wouldn't all this be gone for chess without turns? The video goes into this a little bit. Turns out forking isn’t that useful since your opponent can just move both pieces!
- NhanH 2y ago
  The strategies will change, but it is not certain to be more “intricate”, it could go both way. It is probably more likely that adding the other physical limitation of the human body causes one strategy to be vastly more effective, and the game becomes less intricate. The reason is fairly simple: a game does not become “intricate” or “interesting” by accident. We iterated through a lot variations before we settled down on this version of chess that has the suitable intricacy for us. Adding a new factor probably needs a couple more decades/ centuries of refinement before we get to a version that has similar property to the current one. The similar situation in Starcraft: for machines that plays the game, certain units just become the only way to play (mostly long range high damage units). Human can’t choose 100 targets at once, machines can. If you balance the game for machines, then those units would be useless for human players
- dullcrisp 2y ago
  If you like the humor you should watch the linked video!
- 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
akrotkov 2y ago
I spent hundreds of hours 20 years ago playing Kung Fu Chess[1], which was the (first?) online version of this concept. That was a fun time. The physical board and magnets definitely add a cool factor to it as does the physical dexterity element. Nice project! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung-Fu_Chess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung-Fu_Chess
- ece 2y ago
  The Wikipedia page mentions the Chezz app, and it's available and fun. Reminds me of really bad chess too.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
rideontime 2y ago
Don't miss the linked video on YouTube, the first 30 seconds had me hooked. Very impressive project and production values to match.
HenryBemis 2y ago
> Chess is boring. I'm boring.. Nope. You are boring (and feel free to be). Chess is not boring. That's it.
vlovich123 2y ago
For those wondering how the players could take pieces during the cool down, you’re allowed to move your opponent’s piece because you wear a strap with different frequencies (500hz and 750hz) which lets the board know who is and isn’t allowed to move a piece.
Aperocky 2y ago
Highly suggest to check out his homepage: https://github.com/misprit7 https://github.com/misprit7, as its not the first time I've seen his project up here (and deservedly so!), his foosbar machine was definitely worth a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrwXZXGiP1w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrwXZXGiP1w As a fellow engineer, I am in awe - I wonder what his full time colleagues think when he walks in as an intern with that kind of github presence.
misprit7 2y ago
Hey, I'm the one who made this! My video on it probably does a better job of explaining it than the github so I'd recommend checking that out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VtSK23_Jg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VtSK23_Jg If anyone has any questions about the engineering process/game itself I'd be happy to answer.
- joymonger 2y ago
  I'd agree that the video is much more captivating. It's really an incredible and innovative piece of hardware. I am curious, did you ever arrange a meetup with Magnus?
  - misprit7 2y ago
    No :(
    - spuz 2y ago
      I'd really love to see some high level players try it. Did you get anywhere with letting Hikaru have a go? I know that he said he would be interested when he watched your video.
- sparky_z 2y ago
  Does the system of electromagnets do anything to enforce legal vs illegal moves? Seems like another way for your untrustworthy friends to cheat. When your opponent's distracted, just put your queen anywhere you like. Also, is there a rule about moving one piece at a time? I was surprised I didn't see anyone two-handing it. If it were me, my opening move would be to grab 4 pawns at one (2 in each hand) and shifting them all forward two spaces. That would have been my first instinct.
  - misprit7 2y ago
    No. The intention with the electromagnets wasn't really to prevent malicious cheating, just mostly to enforce cooldowns since it's very easy to forget/miss the different color of lights. The games are generally very chaotic and due to user error there are usually a few incorrect touches throughout the game that have to be quickly corrected manually anyways, so enforcing legal moves wouldn't make the experience better. As for moving multiple pieces at once, the rule I have is only one hand and one piece at a time. This goes a long way towards preventing accidental bumps into other pieces and weird board states where there are multiple pieces in the process of being moved at once.
elijahbenizzy 2y ago
This is amazing! I love that it requires very fancy hardware that is well designed. It's good someone finally made a chess game appropriate for the tiktok generation.
Nifty3929 2y ago
Nice use of bold in the pitch!
gus_massa 2y ago
Is it possible to make the squares sligtly conical (like a dinner plate) with the magnet at the bottom, so the pieces are aligned naturaly in the center when they land?
mollerhoj 2y ago
Highest rated youtube comment: "Send us a board and we’ll make a video of Magnus Carlsen playing on it! We’ll cover your expenses of course." Man that'd be fun to watch
Mekaniko 2y ago
Cool thing. How do you handle the interaction between 2 pieces being moved at the same time ? Can I dodge a capture by picking up a piece ? Say 2 rooks are facing each other, how do you handle a mutual capture attempt ? I have solved this problem, but still in a turn based setting : * Both player choose their move, and moves are resolved simultaneously * A piece cannot be moved 2 turns in a row (discrete cooldown time) * When 2 pieces land at the same place, they are both considered captured. * If they move in straight lines, in opposite direction, they are also both captured. * NO CAPTURE for pieces crossing each other path / knights can exchange their positions. * No pat. A player can skip his turn. * the goal is to capture the oposite king obviosuly, not to checkmake it. With a low blitz time, it solves the same fundamental problem as RT chess, but it can only be played online. From a few test game, it looks like basic chess structure is preserved. But then there is the question of finding the Nash equilibirum of the game ! 2by2-simultaneous-move-chess with both rook and king leads to some sort of rock-paper-scissor.

262 points by dschuessler 2y ago

There was a demo from around 5+ years ago of a experimental real-time Chess board which looked remarkably similar. Once a piece was moved, a visible circular timer with a duration proportional to the piece valuation would count down until they were allowed to move the piece again. I wish I could find the link but trying to search YT for relevant results older than a couple years is just trash.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
hnlmorg 2y ago
Could it be the Kung Fu Chess games mentioned in the video?

mnky9800n 2y ago

Why is ass and anal bolded in the readme? The git blame says you did it. Haha.

xg15 2y ago
I think it's a nod to the controversy he alluded to in the previous sentences, which exposed some more unorthodox cheating strategies. You can read about it in the link.
quuxplusone 2y ago
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/sport/hans-niemann-denies-sex-toys-cheating-chess-spt-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/sport/hans-niemann-denies-sex...
iwontberude 2y ago
I think the ass speaks for itself
meowface 2y ago
It refers to a player accused of cheating against Magnus Carlsen, with widespread speculation that the cheating might've been done using an anal vibrator. (There's zero evidence it actually was an anal device; no one knows how he might've cheated if he indeed cheated. It just became a big meme.)
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
  Hans Niemann almost certainly did not cheat against Carlsen. Carlsen just played that game rather poorly and ragequit the tournament because he's a baby who can't handle losing. I do think Niemann may have cheated in OTB chess before. But not at the Sinquefield Cup, I just don't see it. And the only evidence is insinuations from a sore loser who's well known for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get his way. The buttplug stuff was really just a joke from reddit, no one's seriously suggested anyone is actually cheating using a buttplug. Doesn't even make sense as a way of cheating, really. It would be extremely obvious.
  - olddustytrail 2y ago
    Hans Niemann almost certainly did cheat against Carlsen. Everyone who knows about chess found that game hugely suspicious (see Hikaru's comments on it). The idea that Carlsen can't stand losing is a theory from people who don't know about chess. His lose rate is about 15%. All GMs lose games all the time. It's keeping the win rate as high as possible that makes them the best. The notion that any GM would get so upset simply about losing a single game is just nonsense.
    - mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
      I've been playing tournament chess for 20 years. Not every game is created equal. Some losses are more upsetting than others. Carlsen has some narcissistic traits, which is unsurprising given that he's been showered in adulation from the chess world and general public since he was a small child(and this is common in these chess virtuosos. See Kasparov, Fischer, Kramnik, Nakamura). He might be able to handle losing to someone he considers his peer, but there are plenty of things about Niemann's personality rumours circulating about his online cheating during the game, and his rating at the time that made this loss particularly hard to handle. And GMs have had plenty of bad reactions to losses throughout the history of chess. It definitely happens. Chess is an emotionally taxing game. You spend many hours of exhausting effort at the board only to lose due to a momentary brainfart. It's infuriating. GMs are humans too. Hell, fairly recently there was an incident when GM Christopher Yoo punched a photographer after losing a game at a tournament in St Louis.

xg15 2y ago

> so this should be a pretty uncontroversial minor rules update My kind of humor. Always found it an interesting aspect of chess that the most "common sense" rules (Players take turns; no skipping; one move per turn) result in the most unintuitive outcomes and a massive increase in complexity: Suddenly you can reason about the pieces a player won't be able to move in a turn, you can double-bind players, you get draws where its provably impossible for any player to win, etc. (In that sense, chess is a bit like the IntercalScript language earlier today: All features are superficially reasonable and in the service of simplicity, yet result in the weirdest outcomes) Wouldn't all this be gone for chess without turns? Or would strategies become even more intricate, e.g. taking into account the minimum time you'd require to physically move a piece?

pimlottc 2y ago
> Wouldn't all this be gone for chess without turns? The video goes into this a little bit. Turns out forking isn’t that useful since your opponent can just move both pieces!
NhanH 2y ago
The strategies will change, but it is not certain to be more “intricate”, it could go both way. It is probably more likely that adding the other physical limitation of the human body causes one strategy to be vastly more effective, and the game becomes less intricate. The reason is fairly simple: a game does not become “intricate” or “interesting” by accident. We iterated through a lot variations before we settled down on this version of chess that has the suitable intricacy for us. Adding a new factor probably needs a couple more decades/ centuries of refinement before we get to a version that has similar property to the current one. The similar situation in Starcraft: for machines that plays the game, certain units just become the only way to play (mostly long range high damage units). Human can’t choose 100 targets at once, machines can. If you balance the game for machines, then those units would be useless for human players
dullcrisp 2y ago
If you like the humor you should watch the linked video!
2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

akrotkov 2y ago

I spent hundreds of hours 20 years ago playing Kung Fu Chess[1], which was the (first?) online version of this concept. That was a fun time. The physical board and magnets definitely add a cool factor to it as does the physical dexterity element. Nice project! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung-Fu_Chess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung-Fu_Chess

ece 2y ago
The Wikipedia page mentions the Chezz app, and it's available and fun. Reminds me of really bad chess too.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

rideontime 2y ago

Don't miss the linked video on YouTube, the first 30 seconds had me hooked. Very impressive project and production values to match.

HenryBemis 2y ago

> Chess is boring. I'm boring.. Nope. You are boring (and feel free to be). Chess is not boring. That's it.

vlovich123 2y ago

For those wondering how the players could take pieces during the cool down, you’re allowed to move your opponent’s piece because you wear a strap with different frequencies (500hz and 750hz) which lets the board know who is and isn’t allowed to move a piece.

Aperocky 2y ago

Highly suggest to check out his homepage: https://github.com/misprit7 https://github.com/misprit7, as its not the first time I've seen his project up here (and deservedly so!), his foosbar machine was definitely worth a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrwXZXGiP1w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrwXZXGiP1w As a fellow engineer, I am in awe - I wonder what his full time colleagues think when he walks in as an intern with that kind of github presence.

misprit7 2y ago

Hey, I'm the one who made this! My video on it probably does a better job of explaining it than the github so I'd recommend checking that out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VtSK23_Jg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VtSK23_Jg If anyone has any questions about the engineering process/game itself I'd be happy to answer.

joymonger 2y ago
I'd agree that the video is much more captivating. It's really an incredible and innovative piece of hardware. I am curious, did you ever arrange a meetup with Magnus?
- misprit7 2y ago
  No :(
  - spuz 2y ago
    I'd really love to see some high level players try it. Did you get anywhere with letting Hikaru have a go? I know that he said he would be interested when he watched your video.
sparky_z 2y ago
Does the system of electromagnets do anything to enforce legal vs illegal moves? Seems like another way for your untrustworthy friends to cheat. When your opponent's distracted, just put your queen anywhere you like. Also, is there a rule about moving one piece at a time? I was surprised I didn't see anyone two-handing it. If it were me, my opening move would be to grab 4 pawns at one (2 in each hand) and shifting them all forward two spaces. That would have been my first instinct.
- misprit7 2y ago
  No. The intention with the electromagnets wasn't really to prevent malicious cheating, just mostly to enforce cooldowns since it's very easy to forget/miss the different color of lights. The games are generally very chaotic and due to user error there are usually a few incorrect touches throughout the game that have to be quickly corrected manually anyways, so enforcing legal moves wouldn't make the experience better. As for moving multiple pieces at once, the rule I have is only one hand and one piece at a time. This goes a long way towards preventing accidental bumps into other pieces and weird board states where there are multiple pieces in the process of being moved at once.

elijahbenizzy 2y ago

This is amazing! I love that it requires very fancy hardware that is well designed. It's good someone finally made a chess game appropriate for the tiktok generation.

Nifty3929 2y ago

Nice use of bold in the pitch!

gus_massa 2y ago

Is it possible to make the squares sligtly conical (like a dinner plate) with the magnet at the bottom, so the pieces are aligned naturaly in the center when they land?

mollerhoj 2y ago

Highest rated youtube comment: "Send us a board and we’ll make a video of Magnus Carlsen playing on it! We’ll cover your expenses of course." Man that'd be fun to watch

Mekaniko 2y ago

Cool thing. How do you handle the interaction between 2 pieces being moved at the same time ? Can I dodge a capture by picking up a piece ? Say 2 rooks are facing each other, how do you handle a mutual capture attempt ? I have solved this problem, but still in a turn based setting : * Both player choose their move, and moves are resolved simultaneously * A piece cannot be moved 2 turns in a row (discrete cooldown time) * When 2 pieces land at the same place, they are both considered captured. * If they move in straight lines, in opposite direction, they are also both captured. * NO CAPTURE for pieces crossing each other path / knights can exchange their positions. * No pat. A player can skip his turn. * the goal is to capture the oposite king obviosuly, not to checkmake it. With a low blitz time, it solves the same fundamental problem as RT chess, but it can only be played online. From a few test game, it looks like basic chess structure is preserved. But then there is the question of finding the Nash equilibirum of the game ! 2by2-simultaneous-move-chess with both rook and king leads to some sort of rock-paper-scissor.