First time I see a video of a pro checkers tournament, I knew they were organized in similar fashion to chess, but it's really interesting to actually see how familiar it all look. Many years ago I played a few amateur chess competitions with my city's team, we practiced together with the checkers team and it was quite fun to watch they play, I tried it a couple times, but I was mostly too scared to face them in their own territory 😅 The checkers people on the other hand, were much open to playing chess, which was very cool and brave of them to not be afraid of any challenge, many became reserves for the chess competitions, since we had few chessplayers.
"Checkers" can mean a lot of different games. To a Brit, it would normally mean playing with 12 checkers each on an 8 x 8 board. That game was solved many years ago so you couldn't really have a serious event in that game. Hence (as others have said), this game is the 10 x 10 version which is far from solved.
What you're talking about only applies to American Checkers. This game has been solved: what has been proven is that if both players play perfectly, the result is a draw. White players therefore have no advantage. What's more, in this video,we're talking about International Checkers, which has not yet been resolved in this sense.
@@artichoke60045 This changes after each move, although minimally in the early game. Most often, the game is decided between moves 35 and 45. A change in the indicator by 10% means a loss/profit of one checker, which at this level means a loss/win.
@@artichoke60045If you mean that the arrow indicating the best move for a given position has changed, it's simply that as long as the move hasn't been played by the player, the computer continues to calculate and if it finds a better move, it indicates it. This is a real-time display, not one added after the game. This is also proof of the complexity of the game. Even the computer doesn't immediately find the best position!
Perhaps you have played American checkers, but here in 100-square checkers or in Brazilian 64-square checkers (both games have the same rules), you can capture backwards. It's an important element of strategy.
Yes, I agree, we always played that a king checker could capture in any direction, but a regular checker could only capture forward. This is an interesting rule difference that I'm sure greatly increases the strategy options and complexity of the game.
So regular checkers can move only forward but can also capture backward, and kings can move forward and back as well as capture forward and back? That's a real difference. Trying to think of what might be similar in chess -- one allowing en passant pawn captures and the other not? It's probably a bigger difference than that, and that's a big difference. I noticed there wasn't a lot of emphasis on getting a king, black just did it when it didn't seem there was anything better to do toward the end of the game. More central play.
@@artichoke60045 In terms of rules, it is exactly as you write. However, in terms of strategy, it is a very complex problem, there is no universal method of playing the game. Although the center is actually important in every type of drafts.
@@Randald To Natalia and Elena playing this game. But in this video: ruclips.net/video/8eIZdhIYU7g/видео.html Rik Keurentjes, Head Coach of Dutch team, answers to the question about the age of checkers/draughts players, you can easily find it. It's worth to listen to it.
Jumping backwards is forbidden only in American checkers rules, so probably you've just played different version. This 10x10 international draughts are one of the most complex games.
The term "solved" simply indicates that if two players play perfectly, they will reach a draw. That's a pretty good thing! But it doesn't mean that there's a sure-fire winning strategy that you can memorize and apply. A lot of people come up with this idea of a solved game, without really understanding what it means. And this only applies to the simplest version of checkers. International checkers is even more complex.
chess is also practically solved because engines can beat any human. now a game being mathematically solved has no practical meaning if you can't just memorize one winning line to win when the opponent may easily deviate and keep a winnable position.
jako szachista uważam warcabistów za dość ubogich krewnych :) mistrzyni świata, wysoki poziom a te ruchy wydawały mi się bardzo dziwne momentami i chętnie zmierzyłbym się z nimi jako raczej amator warcabowy :) warcaby 100 polowe jeszcze mają sens, bo te 64 polowe zawsze wydawały mnie się bardzo proste i praktycznie zawsze czułem, że jestem w stanie wywalczyć przynajmniej remis, zresztą ilość kombinacji nie jest aż tak wielka jak u szachów skoro zostały już policzone w całości :)
It's not just a question of the number of squares. In American checkers, you can only capture forward, the king can only move one square, and there's no notion of majority capture (capturing the maximum number of pieces). This is the simplest variant of checkers. However, when played at a high level, it is much more complex than you might think. If you want to discover checkers, you might as well go straight to International Checkers, the standard tournament version. In this game, pawns can capture forward and backward, the king can move several squares and the majority capture must be applied. All of this enriches the game enormously. The checkerboard is 10x10, but Brazil and some Eastern European countries also play 8x8, with the same rules. And of course, whatever the variant, this game is nothing without the obligatory catch. If you want to play with good players, there's Lidraughts, which also has a powerful AI and analysis module. It's always nice to see players curious about games other than their favorite.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Thanks for answer. I don't know American checkers, I said about international checkers 8x8 which is the most popular in Poland, 10x10 is most often played at tournaments. This is also a certain disadvantage of checkers, that it has many types and rules. Chess has the same rules everywhere. But yeah it can be useful and developmental for players if they interested other games. By example GO is another interesting game which is supposedly even more difficult than chess.
@@checkers_tv It might be interesting to make a video on this type of tool, showing how it works and how it can be used to progress. Your teaching skills would do wonders!
Question, @15:33 did white have to capture (forced)? I thought moving forward and promoting to a king would have been better long term? Thanks for sharing the content, like many other comments before me, I never realised this was being played.
Of course I could! In other videos I am commentating what is going on, for example when I played against checkers amateur, it's fully commentated video on this channel.
I'm going to sound like an absolute noob, but here goes. It took me a moment to process that this was a 10x10 board with 20 pieces. Whenever I've played checkers in the past, it was on an 8x8 with 12 pieces. Has this always been the case, and I've been playing the game wrong, or has this been developed because of Chinook solving checkers back in 2007? I also never knew you could take backwards! I was always told that's cheating and you can only take forwards. Nor can you offer a piece to take rather than automatically having to take the piece. This is like a different game, and I feel like my childhood experience was tainted. I almost want to try it again because this looks like a proper game.
In English-speaking countries, we play American checkers: you only capture forward, the kings only move one square... This is the simplest form of checkers. But you still need a lot of practice to play it at a high level. The most important thing is not to abandon the obligatory capture, otherwise you lose much of the richness of the game, and this is the only rule common to all checkers variants. We're talking here about international checkers, whose rules are no less than 300 years old! The 10x10 checkerboard, back capture, majority capture (maximum number of pieces) and "flying" kings add to the richness and interest of the game. If you'd like to get started, there are the excellent instructional videos on this channel (a must on RUclips). For courses in electronic format, go to the "Learn" section of fmjd.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Thanks for answering my question respectfully, first of all. I'm going to have a good luck at the rules because I've always liked the appeal of the game but found the rules, as I knew them very restrictive. But then people were playing rules that I thought they were making up so I stopped playing. It will be good to learn proper sets of rules and have good quality games :)
I am very glad that we are reaching people who thought about checkers in a different way and now change their point of view. Thank you for your open approach and writing such comments!
I don't exactly understand how hg5 whould have helped. Is it a long term issue or something obvious?Cause black can play cd4 anyway (I've barely ever played checkers) Edit: Lol it's not hg5,it's ji5
The women in checkers seem to have a nicer culture than women in chess. In chess, women never analyze after a game, they just get up and leave as fast as possible. Men often analyze and talk after the game but not the women. But in checkers, these players showed mutual respect and interest in the game even after it was over. Good!
You're no doubt referring to "American checkers". But here, we're talking about "International checkers": 10x10 checkerboard, forward and backward capture for mens and "flying" kings. This is the most popular tournament rule. But it is little known in English-speaking countries.
@@checkers_tv Game is literally played on almost identical board, people in the comments are shocked by 2 people sitting on chairs and facing each other in checkers tournaments moving their pieces across the said board, judging by their comments. What did they expect checkers tournament to look like? People playing while standing on their heads and moving pieces with their feet?
This kind of reaction comes from people who believe that checkers is a game with very simple strategies that don't justify organizing this kind of tournament. For them, it's a bit like organizing a tic-tac-toe championship. It's just a question of ignorance of the complexity of this game, especially, as here, in its international variant.
This is a beginner's mistake. By doing so, you leave your other pieces outnumbered by your opponent, who will have committed all his. And in any case, your pieces won't be able to stay on the last line forever, either because all your other pieces will have been eliminated, or because your opponent will dislodge them thanks to the compulsory capture.
You're not very observant! You haven't even noticed that this game isn't played on a chessboard, but on a checkerboard (10x10). The fact that the pieces are uniform is a feature common to the vast majority of abstract combinatorial games, such as Go. Chess has retained a lower level of abstraction, with this stylized representation of an ancient battle, with its different types of units (infantry, cavalry...). All these abstract games are wonderful. Unfortunately, checkers is much underestimated by many people, who know neither the real rules nor the strategies.
Of course! If anyone takes any game seriously, they will want to play the opening well. And knowledge of how to play the opening well is "opening theory" by definition.
Whether it's chess or checkers, women are no less talented. There are simply far fewer of them. As a result, the pool from which female champions could emerge is much smaller. In fact, if parity were ever to be achieved, women's tournaments would no longer be justified. This notion of population size is not limited to the ratio of men to women. Countries with large numbers of players, where the game is played in schools... such as the Netherlands or Russia, for example, top the international rankings. So don't be mistaken about women's ability to excel at strategy games.
Natalia Sadowska añade el argumento de que los hombres están orientados a las tareas y pueden concentrarse plenamente en el juego (tarea). Las mujeres a menudo tienen otras cosas en el fondo de sus mentes. Otro tema es el apetito por el riesgo. Las mujeres parecen ser más conservadoras (como conducir) que los hombres. Y en las damas, el juego agresivo a menudo vale la pena.
@@checkers_tv También he leído criterios científicos de que el hombre tiene el cerebro más grande, memoriza más y tiene ese instinto de lucha , de guerra , más desarrollado que las mujeres. Desde nuestros antepasados...
@@jorgecobas3386Men's brains are on average 10% larger than women's, at around 1,350 kg for men versus 1,200 kg for women. On average, women have slightly more white matter and men slightly more grey matter. However, it should be noted that neither brain size nor the proportions of grey and white matter have any impact on an individual's intellectual capacities. Albert Einstein, for example, had a brain weighing 1.250 kg. In fact, advances in research into brain development and cerebral plasticity show that girls and boys have the same cerebral aptitudes in terms of cognitive functions such as intelligence, memory, attention and reasoning. Publications that attempt to show the contrary are methodologically biased and lack rigor. As for aggressiveness, it's more a question of social behavior, which for the same individual can vary depending on the activity. In an interview, Natalia Sadowska confessed that her coach had advised her to moderate her aggressiveness at checkers ! In any case, this is not a genetically inherited instinct. In short, science shows that there is no difference in intellectual capacity between men and women. The real differences are sociological. Don't give credence to what are often just prejudices.
These rules are already several hundred years old. There are simply different variants of the game, with different rules. You probably have been playing American checkers until now.
Hem... try playing against good checkers players or even Scan on Lidraughts, and you'll see the difference between simple rules and complex strategies...
If you found yourself playing with one of these two players, you'd be completely crushed without understanding what was happening to you. Only your ignorance could make you say such stupid things.
Bo pula czasu na rozegranie całej partii jest skończona, to nie jest czas na pojedynczy ruch, tylko całą grę. To sprawia, że kolejnym ważnym elementem gry jest właśnie zarządzanie czasem.
Yes, but we only play on the black squares (50). So chess is played on even more squares (64). And that's nothing compared to Go, where the game is played on 19x19 (181)!
As the legendary chess grandmaster who also plays checkers, Vassily Ivanchuk, said: "Both are very difficult". You will find this statement in another video on this channel "Is checkers simple and solved".
This is too easy for chess, chess is an immortal game, as one author says. 10 to the power of 120 possible moves, you know how much that is - chess is too big for the human mind as well as for the computer. They say that the number of elementary particles in our universe is an estimate, of course we don't know that, but come on, 10 to the power of 87, chess moves 10 to 120, and where are the strength of the pieces and their combinatorics, the complexity of positions, great dangers, traps, the queen, the knight and the rook fight over the whole board, etc., etc., when someone tells me that the Chinese game of Go or this Mice is harder than chess, I just smile sweetly. Well, look at the best chess players in the world, what they are able to do and how intellectually dominant they are over the players of these games, imagine when you play without an assistant (secondary) ten simultaneous games blindly at Harvard like Magnus Carlsen, that's 320 positions on 10 boards, they are constantly changing from move to move, you have to know each piece where it beats, what it attacks, what it defends, if you play the so-called impossible move, you forget where your figure is, so move it to the square, you've lost it.
Your comment is based on circular reasoning: chess is said to be the most complex game because of the performance (blind simultaneous games) of certain people... at chess! Haven't you wondered whether these same people would have obtained similar results in Go or checkers? Players who know these games well agree that it's harder to visualize and memorize Go and checkers games, partly because of the uniformity of the pieces, and partly because of the multiple captures in checkers and the increasingly complex configuration during a Go game. Despite this, some players achieve great feats, such as Ton Sijbrands, who played 32 international checkers simultaneous blind games, winning 14 and drawing 18. In terms of the number of possible positions, chess is completely overtaken by Go. In any case, for all three games, this number far exceeds human capabilities, and for none of them is there an infallible winning strategy. The computer is now much stronger than man, whatever the game, and is no longer seen as an adversary but as a training and analysis tool. We really need to break out of this parochialism, especially from some chess players, and promote abstract strategy games as a whole to the general public.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Everything you said is incorrect, first of all you don't know what the error of circular reasoning is, I really do, because I'm a philosopher by training. What you stated is not inference in a circle, because I did not assume what I need to prove, and I did not say that it is the most difficult because it is possible to play simultaneously blindly, but I stated the reasons for it: a strategy that involves chess and chess reasoning is incomparable more complex than Go and other games, precisely because there are pieces and pawns that have different strengths, in the game of Go you have to surround the opponent's pieces, while in chess you have to checkmate the king, it is incomparably more complex and abstract, there are pieces, that is, chess in terms of material, there are different styles of play - attacking and positional, pieces have much stronger power, and moves are much more dangerous, in one situation you have no danger, and then two following moves you can get checkmate danger, or you have the possibility to force checkmate in 8 moves, but it is so difficult to calculate and see, for example, otherwise, a move in chess is not def. when one player moves a piece, but when both players play a move, it is only one move - to be clear. Now I'm going to send you a problem that was posed by a Belgian chess player that the greatest chess players of that time failed to solve, but at that tournament everyone was in one place, and neither was the computer, but Mihael Talj solved it from another time, an incredibly difficult problem , and you know how many such there are, you have, for example, a forced checkmate in 10 moves, and the branching of possible moves from those 10 can go, for example, to the power of that move 4-5 times, so see how many possible moves there are. By the way, it is not at all true that computers play better than humans, in fact, you have examples where computers cannot solve problems that below average chess players can easily solve, computers are only programmed and stored with information, they do not understand the game, as they do not have creativity and intelligence, which man has everything, like Godel with his theorem of the incompleteness of mathematics that there are mathematical truths discovered by the human mind that no computer will be able to solve, because it is about necessary truths that are irrefutable. Not to mention that John Searle, a contemporary American philosopher, cut the argument on the thesis of strong artificial intelligence with his so-called famous Chinese room argument, which he showed that computers are not only less intelligent than humans and that they do not think, but that they are not intelligent at all, that is, they do not understand any knowledge, because they are purely syntactic programmed machines, and syntax is not sufficient for semantics, etc. etc., I don't have time or space to explain all that to you further, live in your false beliefs. Also, Gödel showed that with the incompleteness theorem an incredible thing, and it is irrefutable, because it is a mathematical proof, therefore, a mathematical theorem of necessary truth, that if the human mind has discovered the truth about the limitation of our formal systems - in this case mathematics, then either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine, it has creativity that surpasses any possible algorithm. Let's not say that what you claim is a classic deception, because computers all the so-called. more cognitive functions are performed incomparably more slowly than humans - writing, translating, composing and everything that requires human intelligence and creativity. When you see how computers compose, you cry with laughter, can a computer write symphonies like Bruckner or Mahler, or works like Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, etc., etc., no, and never will be able to, because only secret human genius can! Same as mathematics, chess is so giant for human mind which is much more then algorithm and machine. Which mathematical or philosophical problem can a computer solve? Give me just one, I don't mean to solve the equation, but the biggest problems that are the basis of those sciences as solved by Leibniz, Descartes, Russell, Riemann, Euler, Gauss, Frege, Hilbert, von Neumann, Godel, and other great figures of mathematics and philosophy. By the way, learn what the problem of circular inference is, because you don't know anything about inference at all, circular inference is when you have the identity of the definiendum and definiens, and you don't even know what those terms means, just like you don't even know what a statement formula, proof, theorem is , deductive and inductive rules, etc., etc.
If you think it's all about complexity, then chess far behind xiangqi, shogi and go. It's a shame that a lot of chess players consider their game better than checkers and stay silent about these three. Thanks God it's not about complexity, but just having fun
There's about the same proportion of women in checkers as in chess or other strategy games (too low). This is the result of a cultural tendency to reserve such games for men. But when women play at a high level, they are just as good as men. It's just a question of population size. If you were to play a game with one of these two players, you would painfully discover both the real complexity of this game and your low level compared to these players.
If you think that, you've never played the game seriously. Have you ever played international checkers (10x10, backward capture , mandatory capture, majority capture, flying king)? You confuse simple rules with simple strategies. Like Go, checkers has extremely simple rules. But like Go, at high levels, the strategies and tactics employed can be highly complex. Check out fmjd, "Learn" section. You'll find thousands of pages of lessons.
@@ricardo9467I invite you to find out more about what "solved" implies in this case. (A perfect game always ends in a draw). The game is therefore perfectly balanced. And this only applies to the simplest version of checkers (American checkers). The game played in competition is International Checkers. You seem to think we've found a sure-fire winning strategy. In that case, sign up for international tournaments. You'll become world champion, because nobody else knows such a strategy!
@@ricardo9467 8x8 esta resuelto, particularmente la version americana, pues hay varias 8x8. La version internacional, que se juega en un tablero 10x10, no esta resuelta.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
Do you want more tournament games?🤔 Let me know⬇
Want to learn how to play and win at checkers? Check out my guide ➡ tinyurl.com/simple-checkers
East or West chess is the best
Шахматы круче
Hello again 😅😊
I came from chess as well. I had no idea that checkers tournaments were played so similarly to chess
Same😂
Same
i came from chess. my brain is very confused.
Nice that you came!
x2 loool xD
😂😂
I mean, i saw how to play chekers but this ??????
I thought it had something to do with chess... it's late😂😂 wonder if there's any theory in checkers... like chess..
Wow! There's actually checkers tournaments similar to chess. Who knew?
I bet you think the sun moves around the earth
@@Hacienda_27 If you are an helicentrist belevier its your problem
Me who never plays checkers: "ha, yes, big noob."
chess and checkers are similarly organized but here you can play with watches on your hand
actually one was given by me (streamer) to measure stress level and pulse.
coming from chess this is like being in an alternate universe😂
I know it can seem like that😅
First time I see a video of a pro checkers tournament, I knew they were organized in similar fashion to chess, but it's really interesting to actually see how familiar it all look.
Many years ago I played a few amateur chess competitions with my city's team, we practiced together with the checkers team and it was quite fun to watch they play, I tried it a couple times, but I was mostly too scared to face them in their own territory 😅 The checkers people on the other hand, were much open to playing chess, which was very cool and brave of them to not be afraid of any challenge, many became reserves for the chess competitions, since we had few chessplayers.
Thank you for sharing these experiences!
aint no way women need their own category for checkers 💀
They have it just like in chess
I didn't even know there was such a thing as a professional checkers player. Why have I never seen this before? 🤭
The promotion of checkers isn't taking off, but I'm trying to change that. 🙃
Meus parabéns pelo seu trabalho e Canal sucessos
Thank you!
"Checkers" can mean a lot of different games. To a Brit, it would normally mean playing with 12 checkers each on an 8 x 8 board. That game was solved many years ago so you couldn't really have a serious event in that game. Hence (as others have said), this game is the 10 x 10 version which is far from solved.
Yes, I made a video on this as well ;)
No sabia que había campeonato mundial de Damas, pensaba que quien empieza primero gana, Si se sabe jugar claro.
What you're talking about only applies to American Checkers.
This game has been solved: what has been proven is that if both players play perfectly, the result is a draw. White players therefore have no advantage.
What's more, in this video,we're talking about International Checkers, which has not yet been resolved in this sense.
Is this lichess?
This is lidraughts
An interesting game and so is Murkekos Stars.
What does the arrow show? Strongest computer move?
That's right. The arrow indicates the best move according to engine analysis.
@@checkers_tv I saw it change once during the move.
@@artichoke60045 This changes after each move, although minimally in the early game. Most often, the game is decided between moves 35 and 45. A change in the indicator by 10% means a loss/profit of one checker, which at this level means a loss/win.
@@artichoke60045If you mean that the arrow indicating the best move for a given position has changed, it's simply that as long as the move hasn't been played by the player, the computer continues to calculate and if it finds a better move, it indicates it. This is a real-time display, not one added after the game.
This is also proof of the complexity of the game. Even the computer doesn't immediately find the best position!
Dude I was dragging the video bar thing looking for "most replayed" part, but I guess everyone here doesn't have any clue what was the mistake😂😂
There's a sound effect and the eval bar drops like a rock
the mistake is marked exactly in this way
You can capture backwards, never played draughts like that when i was a kid.
Perhaps you have played American checkers, but here in 100-square checkers or in Brazilian 64-square checkers (both games have the same rules), you can capture backwards. It's an important element of strategy.
Yes, I agree, we always played that a king checker could capture in any direction, but a regular checker could only capture forward. This is an interesting rule difference that I'm sure greatly increases the strategy options and complexity of the game.
@@matthewkirkhart2401 Yes, this increases the complexity enormously! I recommend playing it and seeing for yourself, even out of curiosity.
So regular checkers can move only forward but can also capture backward, and kings can move forward and back as well as capture forward and back? That's a real difference. Trying to think of what might be similar in chess -- one allowing en passant pawn captures and the other not? It's probably a bigger difference than that, and that's a big difference. I noticed there wasn't a lot of emphasis on getting a king, black just did it when it didn't seem there was anything better to do toward the end of the game. More central play.
@@artichoke60045 In terms of rules, it is exactly as you write. However, in terms of strategy, it is a very complex problem, there is no universal method of playing the game. Although the center is actually important in every type of drafts.
How is the average age here higher than at the chess candidates lmao
Is 26.5 higher?
@checkers_tv it's actually 27.2 this year for the candidates but pretty close lol.
@checkers_tv are you referring to the average age of the 2 people closest to the camera? Or the tournament?
@@Randald To Natalia and Elena playing this game. But in this video: ruclips.net/video/8eIZdhIYU7g/видео.html Rik Keurentjes, Head Coach of Dutch team, answers to the question about the age of checkers/draughts players, you can easily find it. It's worth to listen to it.
I did not know checkers is a pro game as well 😭
I'm glad you know it now!
3:01
I was not aware jumping backwards was a legal move there. I have been playing checkers a while and can’t believe I did not know this rule
Jumping backwards is forbidden only in American checkers rules, so probably you've just played different version. This 10x10 international draughts are one of the most complex games.
as a chess player gotta say I never lost in checkers though it looks interesting the fact there are tournaments for it
If you want to challenge yourself, visit lidraughts.org (checkers version of lichess) and I it will be tough not to lose ;)
Nic się nie stało jedna porażka na sto wygranych ,Natalia to polskie złotko Mistrzyni Świata i tego się trzymajmy💪🏅🏆
good job man!!!! you are rock
Thanks! 😍
I haven't played this game since around 2010 or so. It's been chess ever since. I forgot how huge the board was, from a1 to j10 basically.
The squares are numbered from 1 to 50, as in American checkers (there from 1 to 32).
its nice to see draughts being popularized for once
It's extremely popular already. I don't know any children who haven't played it.
10x10, only way to play checkers or draughts as we call it, do miss playing this, but wish I started on chess first at that age
From time to time you can play a game or two ;)
Does it have live rating like chess to see the top players?
Yes, of course. You will find it on fmjd.org
Are they aware that checkers have been solved? 😂
Only american variation of checkers. International checkers 10x10 have never been solved ;)
@philabauer great poinf of view!
That's why we play chess
The term "solved" simply indicates that if two players play perfectly, they will reach a draw. That's a pretty good thing!
But it doesn't mean that there's a sure-fire winning strategy that you can memorize and apply. A lot of people come up with this idea of a solved game, without really understanding what it means.
And this only applies to the simplest version of checkers. International checkers is even more complex.
chess is also practically solved because engines can beat any human. now a game being mathematically solved has no practical meaning if you can't just memorize one winning line to win when the opponent may easily deviate and keep a winnable position.
44 years to finds out there are checkers tournaments :(
Better now than never!
jako szachista uważam warcabistów za dość ubogich krewnych :) mistrzyni świata, wysoki poziom a te ruchy wydawały mi się bardzo dziwne momentami i chętnie zmierzyłbym się z nimi jako raczej amator warcabowy :) warcaby 100 polowe jeszcze mają sens, bo te 64 polowe zawsze wydawały mnie się bardzo proste i praktycznie zawsze czułem, że jestem w stanie wywalczyć przynajmniej remis, zresztą ilość kombinacji nie jest aż tak wielka jak u szachów skoro zostały już policzone w całości :)
It's not just a question of the number of squares. In American checkers, you can only capture forward, the king can only move one square, and there's no notion of majority capture (capturing the maximum number of pieces). This is the simplest variant of checkers. However, when played at a high level, it is much more complex than you might think.
If you want to discover checkers, you might as well go straight to International Checkers, the standard tournament version.
In this game, pawns can capture forward and backward, the king can move several squares and the majority capture must be applied.
All of this enriches the game enormously.
The checkerboard is 10x10, but Brazil and some Eastern European countries also play 8x8, with the same rules.
And of course, whatever the variant, this game is nothing without the obligatory catch.
If you want to play with good players, there's Lidraughts, which also has a powerful AI and analysis module.
It's always nice to see players curious about games other than their favorite.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Thanks for answer. I don't know American checkers, I said about international checkers 8x8 which is the most popular in Poland, 10x10 is most often played at tournaments. This is also a certain disadvantage of checkers, that it has many types and rules. Chess has the same rules everywhere. But yeah it can be useful and developmental for players if they interested other games. By example GO is another interesting game which is supposedly even more difficult than chess.
W sumie moglibyśmy zagrać i zrobiłbym z tego jakiś materiał ☺️ więc śmiało, możemy się umawiać na kilka towarzyskich partii
@@checkers_tv obawiam się, że pewnie jednak dostałbym srogi łomot :)
So there is computer engines for checkers also ?? Which is the strongest computer here ?? Is there any Stockfish or something ?
Yes. It is "Scan" and you can see it in Lidraughts.
I prefer to use Kingsrow which is available for free on the Internet, but the best way to use it is in TurboDambase software.
@@checkers_tv It might be interesting to make a video on this type of tool, showing how it works and how it can be used to progress.
Your teaching skills would do wonders!
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 there is one already, quite old one, on my second channel: ruclips.net/video/4aaeLEAk8b4/видео.html
Same DGT USE IN checker as chess i came from chess aslo
Glad you came! DGT clocks are the same, board is of course a different one, but produced by DGT as well.
Question, @15:33 did white have to capture (forced)? I thought moving forward and promoting to a king would have been better long term? Thanks for sharing the content, like many other comments before me, I never realised this was being played.
Capture is always forced in checkers
In American checkers you could go for the king, but according to the international rules of 10x10 checkers you have to capture backwards.
I never knew checkers had all these systems like chess
Por pura falta de informacao
DUMNI po zwycięstwie wierni po porażce 😊
Cagnus Marlsen is currently the rank 1 checkers player
Vassily Ivanchuk, who has beaten Magnus more than once, isn't even in top1000.
why would one wear two smart watches
One was her, second one was mine, to measure pulse and stress level, I displayed it on the livestream
Could use some commentating for us chess players that got recommended this video but have no clue what is going on.
Of course I could! In other videos I am commentating what is going on, for example when I played against checkers amateur, it's fully commentated video on this channel.
I'm going to sound like an absolute noob, but here goes. It took me a moment to process that this was a 10x10 board with 20 pieces. Whenever I've played checkers in the past, it was on an 8x8 with 12 pieces. Has this always been the case, and I've been playing the game wrong, or has this been developed because of Chinook solving checkers back in 2007?
I also never knew you could take backwards! I was always told that's cheating and you can only take forwards. Nor can you offer a piece to take rather than automatically having to take the piece. This is like a different game, and I feel like my childhood experience was tainted. I almost want to try it again because this looks like a proper game.
In English-speaking countries, we play American checkers: you only capture forward, the kings only move one square...
This is the simplest form of checkers.
But you still need a lot of practice to play it at a high level.
The most important thing is not to abandon the obligatory capture, otherwise you lose much of the richness of the game, and this is the only rule common to all checkers variants.
We're talking here about international checkers, whose rules are no less than 300 years old! The 10x10 checkerboard, back capture, majority capture (maximum number of pieces) and "flying" kings add to the richness and interest of the game.
If you'd like to get started, there are the excellent instructional videos on this channel (a must on RUclips). For courses in electronic format, go to the "Learn" section of fmjd.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Thanks for answering my question respectfully, first of all. I'm going to have a good luck at the rules because I've always liked the appeal of the game but found the rules, as I knew them very restrictive. But then people were playing rules that I thought they were making up so I stopped playing. It will be good to learn proper sets of rules and have good quality games :)
I am very glad that we are reaching people who thought about checkers in a different way and now change their point of view. Thank you for your open approach and writing such comments!
chess>>>
Did the board glitched or is it really happening 😳😳😳
It is a checkersboard (10x10) for International Checkers.
I don't exactly understand how hg5 whould have helped. Is it a long term issue or something obvious?Cause black can play cd4 anyway (I've barely ever played checkers)
Edit: Lol it's not hg5,it's ji5
Squares are numbered from 1 to 50. You will find how on the Internet if you type 'international draughts' ;)
The women in checkers seem to have a nicer culture than women in chess. In chess, women never analyze after a game, they just get up and leave as fast as possible. Men often analyze and talk after the game but not the women. But in checkers, these players showed mutual respect and interest in the game even after it was over. Good!
I agree, it's a very nice behavior showing respect for the rival and for discipline. A very common image at checkers tournaments.
может я и не играю как гроссмейстер, но за то я допускаю ошибки как гроссмейстер, а это многого стоит!
Помню видео ,где играла гроссмейстер Савченко,она в эндшпиле торопилась и вместо 3 ,съела 2 шашки,но соперница остановила часы и подозвала судью
Неверный ход был и в партии Садовской-Тансыккужиной. Оба игрока этого не заметили.
3:00 I don't think it's legal to capture backwards in checkers; only king pieces can go backward.
I'd bet a ton of money that it's legal in this tournament. Nobody blinked when it was played.
You're no doubt referring to "American checkers". But here, we're talking about "International checkers": 10x10 checkerboard, forward and backward capture for mens and "flying" kings. This is the most popular tournament rule. But it is little known in English-speaking countries.
You are telling me a champion at the game doesn't understand the rules, but you do?
Why is the comments section full of idiots who are surprised about checkers being played in a similar fashion to chess?
It's not bad, I'm very happy that I can make many people aware of what professional checkers looks like.
@@checkers_tv Game is literally played on almost identical board, people in the comments are shocked by 2 people sitting on chairs and facing each other in checkers tournaments moving their pieces across the said board, judging by their comments. What did they expect checkers tournament to look like? People playing while standing on their heads and moving pieces with their feet?
This kind of reaction comes from people who believe that checkers is a game with very simple strategies that don't justify organizing this kind of tournament. For them, it's a bit like organizing a tic-tac-toe championship.
It's just a question of ignorance of the complexity of this game, especially, as here, in its international variant.
Pani Natalia jak smutna to jeszcze piękniejsza
I thought with checkers by not moving your back row you just win, lol
This is a beginner's mistake.
By doing so, you leave your other pieces outnumbered by your opponent, who will have committed all his.
And in any case, your pieces won't be able to stay on the last line forever, either because all your other pieces will have been eliminated, or because your opponent will dislodge them thanks to the compulsory capture.
you call this a game, playing in chess board with carrom pieces
You're not very observant! You haven't even noticed that this game isn't played on a chessboard, but on a checkerboard (10x10).
The fact that the pieces are uniform is a feature common to the vast majority of abstract combinatorial games, such as Go.
Chess has retained a lower level of abstraction, with this stylized representation of an ancient battle, with its different types of units (infantry, cavalry...).
All these abstract games are wonderful.
Unfortunately, checkers is much underestimated by many people, who know neither the real rules nor the strategies.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 cry about it
@@alainvillesuzanne8613pay them no heed.
I just want to ask what's the use of light square spaces if game is played on dark squared ones
I wonder if there is classical format in checkers
Of course there is!
Everyone watching: so which move was the mistake?
14:42 🙂
Buen juego errores y errores asi es el juego😊
Is there opening theory in checkers like chess?
Of course! If anyone takes any game seriously, they will want to play the opening well. And knowledge of how to play the opening well is "opening theory" by definition.
Opening books are the fattest ones and all the time, year after year, are updated, as new lines are discovered :)
I expected a confused Ivanchuk running past them.
You can find him in my other videos ;)
checkers tournament 💀
And there are hundreds of them every year! 😮
@@checkers_tv learn how to play chess like a grown adult this is baby sht
Mira que juego al ajedrez pero esto de las damas nunca lo entenderé.
¿Qué es exactamente lo que no entenderás?
Soy ajedrecista, y tengo una pregunta: En las damas los hombres también son mucho más fuertes y mejores que las chicas?? Gracias
Whether it's chess or checkers, women are no less talented. There are simply far fewer of them. As a result, the pool from which female champions could emerge is much smaller.
In fact, if parity were ever to be achieved, women's tournaments would no longer be justified.
This notion of population size is not limited to the ratio of men to women. Countries with large numbers of players, where the game is played in schools... such as the Netherlands or Russia, for example, top the international rankings.
So don't be mistaken about women's ability to excel at strategy games.
Natalia Sadowska añade el argumento de que los hombres están orientados a las tareas y pueden concentrarse plenamente en el juego (tarea). Las mujeres a menudo tienen otras cosas en el fondo de sus mentes. Otro tema es el apetito por el riesgo. Las mujeres parecen ser más conservadoras (como conducir) que los hombres. Y en las damas, el juego agresivo a menudo vale la pena.
@@checkers_tv También he leído criterios científicos de que el hombre tiene el cerebro más grande, memoriza más y tiene ese instinto de lucha , de guerra , más desarrollado que las mujeres. Desde nuestros antepasados...
@@jorgecobas3386Men's brains are on average 10% larger than women's, at around 1,350 kg for men versus 1,200 kg for women.
On average, women have slightly more white matter and men slightly more grey matter.
However, it should be noted that neither brain size nor the proportions of grey and white matter have any impact on an individual's intellectual capacities. Albert Einstein, for example, had a brain weighing 1.250 kg.
In fact, advances in research into brain development and cerebral plasticity show that girls and boys have the same cerebral aptitudes in terms of cognitive functions such as intelligence, memory, attention and reasoning.
Publications that attempt to show the contrary are methodologically biased and lack rigor.
As for aggressiveness, it's more a question of social behavior, which for the same individual can vary depending on the activity. In an interview, Natalia Sadowska confessed that her coach had advised her to moderate her aggressiveness at checkers !
In any case, this is not a genetically inherited instinct.
In short, science shows that there is no difference in intellectual capacity between men and women. The real differences are sociological.
Don't give credence to what are often just prejudices.
The mistake: 14:42
THEY ARE SO PRETTY ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Yes, they are! Like many women players :)
This looks so much like a chess tournament but i dont understand any of the moves
Yeah, it looks the same
Im 1800 at chess but im so bad at checkers😂
It's totally normal ;) you must play thousands of games to start to understand it :)
What was the blunder
She lost 2 pieces making 2 blunders one by one. She let opponent to go between her pieces making a double, unavoidable attack.
During video mans' foots are moving under diagram like checkers steps. :)
People deal with stress in different ways 😅
Je sais qu'il y a des ouvertures aux dames mais je n'en sais pas plus
Les dames s'adressent aussi bien aux hommes qu'aux femmes.
와 개쩐다 체커도 이런 게 있구나
그렇습니다. 체커는 진지하고 전문적인 스포츠입니다.
If you play very bad in chess, they demote you to checkers 😂
If you didn't manage there, unfortunately, you won't manage here either ;)
they can eat by behind. this is new for me. if the rules changed ?
These rules are already several hundred years old. There are simply different variants of the game, with different rules. You probably have been playing American checkers until now.
I play chess I’m just seeing random circles move
Take a look at the International Checkers video series on this channel. After that, you'll find it a lot less random. 😉
well, maybe i could go pro in checkers instead of chess
Good luck! But it's not that easy ;) I play 30 years and my highest place was around #120 in the world.
Por qué separan a los hombres de las mujeres ??? El torneo Tendría que ser mixto Cual es el problema ?? 🤔
Este es un problema muy complejo, escribimos mucho sobre él en respuesta a un comentario anterior en este video.
Omg i though checkers were not dificult
Hem... try playing against good checkers players or even Scan on Lidraughts, and you'll see the difference between simple rules and complex strategies...
ah yes. a scotch game. glad to see they stayed on theory.
Good one!😂
This is really just a copy of chess. Nice!
Tournaments may look the same, but the game itself is completely different ;)
Apparently the game of checkers is much older than chess
@@Аноним25-ж6т yes, some say that its origins are in a Senet game dated 3.000 BC
Historically, chess seems to have been more inspired by checkers than vice versa.
Mi cerebro no logra procesar esta rara información luego de jugar 2000 partidas de ajedrez nunca jugar damas y tener perfecto repertorio en la najdorf
Está despejado. Se necesitan muchos años para comprender bien este juego.
Chess for disabled
Tell that to Vasyl Ivanchuk.
If you found yourself playing with one of these two players, you'd be completely crushed without understanding what was happening to you.
Only your ignorance could make you say such stupid things.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 its a famous joke
Please watch video I'm publishing today "Is checkers simple and solved". We should respect each other ;)
Que asco de juego las damas.
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Isn’t checkers already SOLVED by the engine?
The answer: ruclips.net/video/q5ABFYGtoB0/видео.htmlsi=JL8ODpzqUP5lL_hW
And no, there's no recipe for a sure-fire win...
Check my another video 'Is checkers simple and solved'
Ciekawie się to ogląda, dziewczyny mają pod koniec coraz mniej czasu? Dlaczego tak jest?
Bo pula czasu na rozegranie całej partii jest skończona, to nie jest czas na pojedynczy ruch, tylko całą grę. To sprawia, że kolejnym ważnym elementem gry jest właśnie zarządzanie czasem.
10x10 omg chess is not like this😂
Yes, but we only play on the black squares (50).
So chess is played on even more squares (64).
And that's nothing compared to Go, where the game is played on 19x19 (181)!
I AM BEST IN CHESS AND CHECKERS
Good for you!
Too bad the board is 10x10, otherwise a chess board could be used for this game too
Yes, it complicates the matter a bit, but it's still not that difficult to prepare a 10x10 board.
😂😂😂😂😂😂 I'm not gonna say it IM NOT GONNA SAY IT
Please say it ;p
Which game is more complicated ? Chess or Checkers ?
Chess, unequivocally. Checkers is technically solved.
As the legendary chess grandmaster who also plays checkers, Vassily Ivanchuk, said: "Both are very difficult". You will find this statement in another video on this channel "Is checkers simple and solved".
Only American checkers, not even 64 Brazilian, not to mention this 100-square.
This is too easy for chess, chess is an immortal game, as one author says. 10 to the power of 120 possible moves, you know how much that is - chess is too big for the human mind as well as for the computer. They say that the number of elementary particles in our universe is an estimate, of course we don't know that, but come on, 10 to the power of 87, chess moves 10 to 120, and where are the strength of the pieces and their combinatorics, the complexity of positions, great dangers, traps, the queen, the knight and the rook fight over the whole board, etc., etc., when someone tells me that the Chinese game of Go or this Mice is harder than chess, I just smile sweetly. Well, look at the best chess players in the world, what they are able to do and how intellectually dominant they are over the players of these games, imagine when you play without an assistant (secondary) ten simultaneous games blindly at Harvard like Magnus Carlsen, that's 320 positions on 10 boards, they are constantly changing from move to move, you have to know each piece where it beats, what it attacks, what it defends, if you play the so-called impossible move, you forget where your figure is, so move it to the square, you've lost it.
Your comment is based on circular reasoning: chess is said to be the most complex game because of the performance (blind simultaneous games) of certain people... at chess!
Haven't you wondered whether these same people would have obtained similar results in Go or checkers?
Players who know these games well agree that it's harder to visualize and memorize Go and checkers games, partly because of the uniformity of the pieces, and partly because of the multiple captures in checkers and the increasingly complex configuration during a Go game.
Despite this, some players achieve great feats, such as Ton Sijbrands, who played 32 international checkers simultaneous blind games, winning 14 and drawing 18.
In terms of the number of possible positions, chess is completely overtaken by Go. In any case, for all three games, this number far exceeds human capabilities, and for none of them is there an infallible winning strategy.
The computer is now much stronger than man, whatever the game, and is no longer seen as an adversary but as a training and analysis tool.
We really need to break out of this parochialism, especially from some chess players, and promote abstract strategy games as a whole to the general public.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 Everything you said is incorrect, first of all you don't know what the error of circular reasoning is, I really do, because I'm a philosopher by training. What you stated is not inference in a circle, because I did not assume what I need to prove, and I did not say that it is the most difficult because it is possible to play simultaneously blindly, but I stated the reasons for it: a strategy that involves chess and chess reasoning is incomparable more complex than Go and other games, precisely because there are pieces and pawns that have different strengths, in the game of Go you have to surround the opponent's pieces, while in chess you have to checkmate the king, it is incomparably more complex and abstract, there are pieces, that is, chess in terms of material, there are different styles of play - attacking and positional, pieces have much stronger power, and moves are much more dangerous, in one situation you have no danger, and then two following moves you can get checkmate danger, or you have the possibility to force checkmate in 8 moves, but it is so difficult to calculate and see, for example, otherwise, a move in chess is not def. when one player moves a piece, but when both players play a move, it is only one move - to be clear. Now I'm going to send you a problem that was posed by a Belgian chess player that the greatest chess players of that time failed to solve, but at that tournament everyone was in one place, and neither was the computer, but Mihael Talj solved it from another time, an incredibly difficult problem , and you know how many such there are, you have, for example, a forced checkmate in 10 moves, and the branching of possible moves from those 10 can go, for example, to the power of that move 4-5 times, so see how many possible moves there are. By the way, it is not at all true that computers play better than humans, in fact, you have examples where computers cannot solve problems that below average chess players can easily solve, computers are only programmed and stored with information, they do not understand the game, as they do not have creativity and intelligence, which man has everything, like Godel with his theorem of the incompleteness of mathematics that there are mathematical truths discovered by the human mind that no computer will be able to solve, because it is about necessary truths that are irrefutable. Not to mention that John Searle, a contemporary American philosopher, cut the argument on the thesis of strong artificial intelligence with his so-called famous Chinese room argument, which he showed that computers are not only less intelligent than humans and that they do not think, but that they are not intelligent at all, that is, they do not understand any knowledge, because they are purely syntactic programmed machines, and syntax is not sufficient for semantics, etc. etc., I don't have time or space to explain all that to you further, live in your false beliefs.
Also, Gödel showed that with the incompleteness theorem an incredible thing, and it is irrefutable, because it is a mathematical proof, therefore, a mathematical theorem of necessary truth, that if the human mind has discovered the truth about the limitation of our formal systems - in this case mathematics, then either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine, it has creativity that surpasses any possible algorithm. Let's not say that what you claim is a classic deception, because computers all the so-called. more cognitive functions are performed incomparably more slowly than humans - writing, translating, composing and everything that requires human intelligence and creativity. When you see how computers compose, you cry with laughter, can a computer write symphonies like Bruckner or Mahler, or works like Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, etc., etc., no, and never will be able to, because only secret human genius can! Same as mathematics, chess is so giant for human mind which is much more then algorithm and machine.
Which mathematical or philosophical problem can a computer solve? Give me just one, I don't mean to solve the equation, but the biggest problems that are the basis of those sciences as solved by Leibniz, Descartes, Russell, Riemann, Euler, Gauss, Frege, Hilbert, von Neumann, Godel, and other great figures of mathematics and philosophy. By the way, learn what the problem of circular inference is, because you don't know anything about inference at all, circular inference is when you have the identity of the definiendum and definiens, and you don't even know what those terms means, just like you don't even know what a statement formula, proof, theorem is , deductive and inductive rules, etc., etc.
bruh checkers is a game now?
it always has been! :)
Bro where is there a womans and man section??? Bro all the pieces move literrally the same
Bro this is how checkers works!
Huuuuh????? They have draughts tourneys???
Lots of them!
Is this Chess for noobs?
GM Ivanchuk says otherwise.
Is chess shogi for noobs?
I guess his chess rating is very low to say checkers is simple.
Chess better 🗿
If you think it's all about complexity, then chess far behind xiangqi, shogi and go. It's a shame that a lot of chess players consider their game better than checkers and stay silent about these three. Thanks God it's not about complexity, but just having fun
wtf is checkers?
Why did white resign?
Natalia had a few pieces less and totally lost position
Significantly less pieces
chess is better
women play the easier game lol
There's about the same proportion of women in checkers as in chess or other strategy games (too low).
This is the result of a cultural tendency to reserve such games for men.
But when women play at a high level, they are just as good as men. It's just a question of population size.
If you were to play a game with one of these two players, you would painfully discover both the real complexity of this game and your low level compared to these players.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 who asked?
@@MikeHack-h5vYou made a remark that was both sexist towards women and untrue about the game. Don't be surprised if it's commented on and refuted.
@@alainvillesuzanne8613 again: who tf asked??
@@MikeHack-h5v Nothing to add: don't feed the troll...
Por dios, este "juego" tiene cero complejidad.
Play vs computer. 0-100
Este juego está ya matemáticamente resuelto hace tiempo.
If you think that, you've never played the game seriously. Have you ever played international checkers (10x10, backward capture , mandatory capture, majority capture, flying king)?
You confuse simple rules with simple strategies.
Like Go, checkers has extremely simple rules. But like Go, at high levels, the strategies and tactics employed can be highly complex.
Check out fmjd, "Learn" section. You'll find thousands of pages of lessons.
@@ricardo9467I invite you to find out more about what "solved" implies in this case. (A perfect game always ends in a draw).
The game is therefore perfectly balanced.
And this only applies to the simplest version of checkers (American checkers). The game played in competition is International Checkers.
You seem to think we've found a sure-fire winning strategy. In that case, sign up for international tournaments. You'll become world champion, because nobody else knows such a strategy!
@@ricardo9467 8x8 esta resuelto, particularmente la version americana, pues hay varias 8x8. La version internacional, que se juega en un tablero 10x10, no esta resuelta.
this game is meme
Chess is better,that's for sure!Chess is absolutely fantastic!!!
Кто играет в шашки,они же однообразны
Тому, кто не понимает игру, она кажется однообразной.
I haven't played this game since around 2010 or so. It's been chess ever since. I forgot how huge the board was, from a1 to j10 basically.