U.S. patent application number 12/517929 was filed with the patent office on 2010-01-28 for determination of game characteristics for a game of skill.
Invention is credited to Kyriacos Menicou.
Application Number | 20100022289 12/517929 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 39322640 |
Filed Date | 2010-01-28 |
United States Patent
Application |
20100022289 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Menicou; Kyriacos |
January 28, 2010 |
DETERMINATION OF GAME CHARACTERISTICS FOR A GAME OF SKILL
Abstract
A method and associated system for automatically determining
game characteristics for a game of skill, the method comprising:
(a) determining or accepting a first numerical rating associated
with said first participant; (b) determining or accepting a further
numerical rating associated with a further participant in said
game; wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of an
ability level of said first and further participants, to the extent
said ability level is known; (c) calculating a likelihood of a
scenario, said scenario being representative of a specific outcome
to said game, said likelihood being a mathematical function of said
first and further numerical ratings; (d) generating betting odds
based on said calculated likelihood. One application of the
invention can be found in turn-based games of skill such as chess
or the like.
Inventors: |
Menicou; Kyriacos;
(Hampshire, GB) |
Correspondence
Address: |
YOUNG BASILE
3001 WEST BIG BEAVER ROAD, SUITE 624
TROY
MI
48084
US
|
Family ID: |
39322640 |
Appl. No.: |
12/517929 |
Filed: |
December 5, 2007 |
PCT Filed: |
December 5, 2007 |
PCT NO: |
PCT/GB2007/004641 |
371 Date: |
September 8, 2009 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
60872895 |
Dec 5, 2006 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
463/14 ; 463/25;
463/42 |
Current CPC
Class: |
A63F 2300/5566 20130101;
G07F 17/3295 20130101; G07F 17/32 20130101; A63F 13/332 20140902;
A63F 2300/61 20130101; A63F 2300/558 20130101; A63F 13/798
20140902; A63F 2300/50 20130101; G07F 17/3276 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
463/14 ; 463/25;
463/42 |
International
Class: |
A63F 9/24 20060101
A63F009/24 |
Claims
1. A method for automatically determining game characteristics for
at least one participant in a turn-based game of skill, the method
comprising: (a) determining or accepting a first numerical rating
associated with said first participant; (b) determining or
accepting a further numerical rating associated with a further
participant in said game; wherein said first and further ratings
are indicative of an ability level of said first and further
participants, to the extent said ability level is known; (c)
calculating a likelihood of a scenario, said scenario being
representative of a specific outcome to said game, said likelihood
being a mathematical function of said first and further numerical
ratings; (d) generating a game characteristic for said proposed
game between said first and further participants based on said
calculated likelihood.
2. A method as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: accepting a
first stake value from said first participant; calculating a return
due said first participant if said scenario is realised, said
return being a function both of said stake value and said
likelihood of said scenario.
3. A method as claimed in claim 2, further comprising: calculating
a further stake value for said further participant in dependence on
said calculated return and said first stake value.
4. A method as claimed in claim 2 wherein said calculated return is
a function of an associated fee.
5. A method as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: accepting a
prize fund value; calculating a stake value for each of the first
and further participants in dependence on said prize fund
value.
6. A method as claimed in claim 5 wherein said calculated stake
values are each a function of an associated fee.
7. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said specific outcome is
a win by said first participant.
8. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said specific outcome is
a draw.
9. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said game of skill is a
game of chess or a variant thereof.
10. A method as claimed in claim 1 further comprising: adjusting
said rating associated with at least one of the first and further
participants in dependence on an actual outcome of said game, on
completion of said game.
11. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein the generation of said
game characteristic comprises: generating a handicap for at least
one of the first and further participants based on said likelihood;
generating a virtual rating for at least one of said first and
further participants based on said handicap, and the or each
associated numerical rating; recalculating said likelihood of said
scenario, using each generated virtual rating in place of the
associated numerical ratings; generating betting odds based on said
calculated likelihood.
12. A method as claimed in claim 11 wherein said handicap is
generated such that said that each participant has an approximately
equal chance of winning the game.
13. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein the generation of said
game characteristic comprises: generating a goal for a
corresponding one of the first and further participants based on
said likelihood, wherein on achievement of said goal said
associated participant is designated winner of said game; said goal
being such that each participant has an approximately equal chance
of winning the game.
14. A method as claimed in claim 13 wherein said goal comprises
playing the game for a predetermined number of moves without losing
the game.
15. A method as claimed in claim 13 wherein said goal comprises
achieving a predetermined number of points or else preventing
another participant achieving a predetermined number of points.
16. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said method is
implemented on a central computer in a communications network.
17. A method as claimed in claim 16 wherein said communications
network comprises the Internet.
18. A method as claimed in claim 16 wherein said communications
network comprises a mobile phone I cell phone network.
19. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said method is
implemented as stand alone application on an electronic device.
20. A method for automatically determining odds for a wager placed
by a first participant in a game of skill, the method comprising:
(a) determining or accepting a first numerical rating associated
with said first participant; (b) determining or accepting a further
numerical rating associated with a further participant in said
game; wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of an
ability level of said first and further participants, to the extent
said ability level is known; (c) generating odds for a scenario,
said scenario being representative of a specific outcome to said
game, said odds being based on said first and further numerical
ratings.
21. A method of automatically determining game characteristics for
at least one participant in a turn-based game of skill, the method
comprising: (a) determining or accepting a first numerical rating
associated with said first participant; (b) determining or
accepting a further numerical rating associated with a further
participant in said game; wherein said first and further ratings
are indicative of an ability level of said first and further
participants, to the extent said ability level is known; (c)
determining a differential relationship between said first and
further numerical rating; (d) generating a goal for an associated
one of said players based on said differential relationship,
wherein on achievement of said goal said associated player is
designated winner of said game, said goal being biased in the
favour of one participant so as to reduce a likelihood of the
participant having a greater ability level winning the game.
22. A method as claimed in claim 21 wherein said game is chess or a
variation thereof.
23. A method as claimed in claim 22 wherein said goal for said
associated player is to capture a predetermined number of chess
pieces from an opposing player before said opposing player obtains
checkmate.
24. A method as claimed in claim 22 wherein said goal for said
associated player is to capture chess pieces to a combined value
equal to or exceeding a predetermined value from an opposing player
before said opposing player obtains checkmate.
25. A system for automatically determining game characteristics for
at least one participant in a turn-based game of skill, the system
comprising: input means for determining or accepting a first
numerical rating associated with said first participant and a
further numerical rating associated with a further participant in
said game, wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of
an ability level of said first and further participants, to the
extent said ability level is known; processing means for
calculating a likelihood of a scenario, said scenario being
representative of a specific outcome to said game and said
likelihood being a mathematical function of said first and further
numerical ratings; wherein said processing means is arranged to
generate a game characteristic for said proposed game between said
first and further participants based on said calculated likelihood;
and, display means for communicating the game characteristic to a
user.
26. A system for automatically determining game characteristics for
at least one participant in a turn-based game of skill, the method
comprising: input means for determining or accepting a first
numerical rating associated with said first participant and a
further numerical rating associated with a further participant in
said game, wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of
an ability level of said first and further participants, to the
extent said ability level is known; processing means arranged to
determine a differential relationship between said first and
further numerical rating; wherein said processing means is arranged
to generate a goal for one of said players based on said
differential relationship, such that on achievement of said goal
said player is designated winner of said game, said goal being
biased in the favour of one participant so as to reduce a
likelihood of the participant having a greater ability level
winning the game.
27. A data carrier for operation of a system for automatically
determining game characteristics for at least one participant in a
turn-based game of skill, the data carrier comprising machine
readable instructions for operation of said system to: (a)
determine or accept a first numerical rating associated with said
first participant; (b) determine or accept a further numerical
rating associated with a further participant in said game; wherein
said first and further ratings are indicative of an ability level
of said first and further participants, to the extent said ability
level is known; (c) calculate a likelihood of a scenario, said
scenario being representative of a specific outcome to said game,
said likelihood being a mathematical function of said first and
further numerical ratings; (d) generate a game characteristic for
said proposed game between said first and further participants
based on said calculated likelihood.
28. A data carrier comprising machine readable instructions for
operation of a system according to claim 26.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION
[0001] This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional
Application Ser. No. 60/872,895, filed on Dec. 5, 2006, and from
International Patent Application No. PCT/GB2007/004641, filed on
Dec. 5, 2007, both of which are incorporated herein in their
entirety by reference.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0002] The present invention relates to a method and apparatus for
automatically determining game characteristics for a game of skill,
such as, for example, game rules or odds for a wager placed by a
first participant in the game.
BACKGROUND
[0003] Gambling between participants in online games played across
communication networks such as mobile phone networks and the
Internet is well known. Currently most online gambling of this type
is associated with games of chance, for example card games
including variations on Poker, Blackjack or the like.
[0004] Whilst it will be appreciated that playing such games of
chance successfully may involve very high skill levels, the skill
of playing lies primarily in a player's ability to make decisions
on game play, and to determine an appropriate betting strategy,
based on an understanding both of the likelihood of certain
outcomes, and of the likely way that other players will behave in
response to those decisions and betting strategy. Ultimately,
however, the cards a player is dealt in a card game is determined
by chance.
[0005] Such games are well suited to online gambling precisely
because of the element of chance involved. The chance factor acts
to level the playing field between players having different levels
of experience, making it more attractive for novices to start
playing. Furthermore, in games such as poker, the potential return
to a participant is based on the total waged by other players
during the course of a game. Thus, the potential return can be very
high and as such acts as a major incentive to new participants to
take part. Nevertheless, despite the potentially high returns,
there is very little financial risk to the games provider.
[0006] The playing of games of skill such as chess, across
communication networks is also well known. However, organized
wagering between the participants in games of skill of this type
and especially two player games, such as chess, is currently seen
to be unfeasible.
[0007] Firstly, the outcome of a game of skill depends primarily on
the relative ability of the participating players rather than on
chance factors. However, the players participating in games across
communication networks are generally of unknown ability. Hence, it
is very difficult for a games provider to accurately and reliably
determine the relative skill of different players. Whilst some
games of skill, such as chess, have a recognised rating system for
providing an indication of the ability of players, it is not
possible for the games provider to accurately assess the
reliability of ratings claimed by participants.
[0008] Furthermore, there is little incentive for players to risk a
wager when there is uncertainty relating to the relative ability of
an opponent. For example, a less experienced player may be
reluctant to play or else to risk a wager against a more
experienced player because the risk of losing is too high in
relation to the potential winnings. This reluctance can be
mitigated by more favourable odds being offered to the less
experienced player as an incentive to participate. Additionally or
else alternatively, the players may informally elect to start the
game from a position which favours the weaker player such they are
given a head start. However, the difficulty in accurately assessing
the relative ability of an unknown player, and the reliability of
any claimed rating, makes it difficult for participants to judge
fair odds or suitable starting conditions.
BRIEF SUMMARY
[0009] It is an object of the present invention to provide a method
for automatically determining game characteristics in a game of
skill, for example chess, which mitigates at least some of the
above issues.
[0010] It is a further object of the invention to provide an
improved method for leveling the playing field between players of
different abilities in games of skill.
[0011] According to one aspect of the present invention there is
provided a method for automatically determining game
characteristics for a game of skill, the method comprising: (a)
determining or accepting a first numerical rating associated with
said first participant; (b) determining or accepting a further
numerical rating associated with a further participant in said
game; wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of an
ability level of said first and further participants, to the extent
said ability level is known; (c) calculating a likelihood of a
scenario, said scenario being representative of a specific outcome
to said game, said likelihood being a mathematical function of said
first and further numerical ratings; (d) generating betting odds
based on said calculated likelihood.
[0012] The present invention is particularly suited to turn-based
games of skill, including mental games such as chess, draughts,
backgammon, Othello or the like. However the present invention may
be applied to other games of skill.
[0013] According to a second aspect of the present invention there
is provided a method for automatically determining game
characteristics in a game of skill, the method comprising: (a)
determining or accepting a first numerical rating associated with
said first participant; (b) determining or accepting a further
numerical rating associated with a further participant in said
game; wherein said first and further ratings are indicative of an
ability level of said first and further participants, to the extent
said ability level is known; (c) calculating odds for a scenario,
said scenario being representative of a specific outcome to said
game, said odds being generated based on first and further
numerical ratings.
[0014] The game characteristics in either said first or second
aspects may comprise odds for a wager placed by a first participant
in sad game of skill.
[0015] According to a third aspect of the present invention there
is provided a method of equalizing a two player game of skill
between players of different abilities comprising: for each player
determining or accepting an associated numerical rating, wherein
said each numerical rating is indicative of an ability level of
said associated player calculating a likelihood of at least one of
said players winning said game; generating a goal for an associated
one of said players based on each said calculated likelihood,
wherein on achievement of said goal said associated player is
designated winner of said game; said goal being such that each
participant has an approximately equal chance of winning the
game.
[0016] According to further aspects of the present invention there
are provided a system and a data carrier for implementation of the
methods of any or any combination of the first, second and/or third
aspects of the present invention.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0017] Various embodiments of the invention will now be described
in further detail by way of example only with reference to the
attached figures in which:
[0018] FIG. 1 shows a chess network;
[0019] FIG. 2 shows a chess environment for provision over the
chess network of FIG. 1;
[0020] FIG. 3 shows a flow chart illustrating operation of an odds
calculator forming part of the chess environment of FIG. 2;
[0021] FIG. 4 shows a table for generating odds;
[0022] FIG. 5 shows a table of a worked example of a method for
amending game parameters in accordance with player performance;
[0023] FIG. 6 shows a game set-up area of a user interface forming
part of the chess environment of FIG. 2; and
[0024] FIG. 7 shows a game play area of a user interface forming
part of the chess environment of FIG. 2.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
[0025] An embodiment of the invention will now be described by way
of example only, with reference to the game of chess. It will be
appreciated by those skilled in the art that many features of the
invention are just as well suited to other games of skill and in
particular to other games of skill involving two players.
Chess Network
[0026] In FIG. 1, a chess network is illustrated generally at 10.
The network comprises a communications network having a plurality
of player nodes 12, and at least one provider node 14,
interconnected via a communications medium 16.
[0027] The chess network 10 can be implemented using any suitable
communications architecture. The chess network 10 may, for example,
be implemented over the Internet. In an Internet based chess
network each player node 12 comprises an interface device capable
of accessing the Internet, such as a desktop or laptop personal
computer, a personal digital assistant, or a mobile/cell phone or
the like. Each provider node 14 will typically comprise a server
computer or the like, and the communications medium 16 will
comprise either an intranet or the Internet itself.
[0028] Alternatively or additionally the chess network 10 may be
implemented using a mobile communication, cell phone, network or
the like, in which each player node 12 is a mobile communications
device compatible with the network.
[0029] According to a further embodiment, each player node 12 may
communicate over a local wired or wireless network. In any of the
above embodiments, the provider node may also be a player node such
that any player node 12 can host a network game for a plurality of
players. It will also be appreciated to the person skilled in the
art that a plurality of nodes may not be required and the present
invention could in one embodiment be implemented using a single
player node 12 having player data stored for a plurality of
players. In such an embodiment, a user interface and/or controls
may be provided for each player or else each player could share, or
take turns in using a single user interface or set of user
controls.
[0030] The invention may be implemented on suitable hardware using
a data carrier comprising the relevant machine-readable
instructions, such as a data signal or a data storage device such
as a CD, DVD, a memory stick, a hard disk or any other suitable
media.
[0031] The following description applies to Internet based online
chess games in particular. It will be appreciated, however, that
the technology could easily be adapted to other communications
networks or else for devices which are not continually connected to
a network. Any device comprising processing means such as for
example a CPU, storage means and a display means may be sufficient
for carrying out the present invention.
[0032] The provider node 14 is configured to provide a chess
environment over the Internet 16 to allow a participant at a
particular player node 12 to participate in an online game of chess
with another participant at any other player node 12, in real time.
The implementation of real time chess games across the Internet is
well known and will not be described again in detail.
[0033] A commercial provider operates the provider node 14, and
participants in online games are either members of the chess
network, computer competitors, or invited guests. Invited guests
may include well-known players such as grandmasters, celebrities or
the like. It will be appreciated that grandmasters may also be
members of the chess network in their own right.
[0034] In FIG. 2 a block diagram illustrating a chess environment
is shown generally at 20. The chess environment 20 is split into
three main areas: a play for real money area 22; a play for virtual
money area 24; and a play for free area 26. Any of areas 22, 24 or
26 may be provided as a stand-alone network game environment
[0035] The play for money area 22 is configured to provide access
to aspects of chess that can be played for money, including the
provision for ad-hoc and pre-arranged games between participants,
organized games between members and invited guests, and games
between members/invited guests and computer competitors. In the
real money area 22 provision is made for members to make wagers on
their own performance in a game against another member, against an
invited guest, or against a computer competitor. Provision is also
made for members to spread bet on various scenarios in games
involving a participant of a particularly high skill level, for
example, a grandmaster. Spread betting may cover any appropriate
scenario, for example, betting on what opening gambit used, the
first piece captured, the pieces remaining on the board at the end
of the game, or the like.
[0036] It will be appreciated that although the a principal aim of
the invention is to allow members to place a wager at appropriate
odds on a game they participate in, the invention also facilitates
the placing of wagers by non-participant members on games. Wagers
by non-participant members may be restricted for example by
legislation, or to limit the exposure of a provider to financial
loss as a result of fraud. Wagers could, for example, be limited to
games between participants of similar ratings, thereby preventing
participants betting on artificially generated long odds.
[0037] The winnings for a wager placed by a participant in a game
is paid out of the opponents stake, thereby eliminating financial
risk to the provider for such bets.
[0038] Members are also provided with means to challenge a
grandmaster to play against a computer competitor and on acceptance
of the challenge, to bet on the result, or to spread bet on various
scenarios.
[0039] The virtual money area 24 is provided to allow a member to
set-up and play an ad-hoc or a pre-arranged game against another
member for virtual money. The virtual money area is provided to
allow participants to hone, not only their chess playing skills,
but also their skills at assessing the appropriate level and nature
of wagers to play, and also the risk level involved in making such
wagers against participants of differing experience and
ability.
[0040] The virtual money area does allow members to spread bet on
grandmaster games, but all other aspects of real money play are not
made available in the virtual money area.
[0041] The free play area 26 allows members to set-up and play
ad-hoc and pre-arranged games of chess purely for fun and
enjoyment, without any financial implications.
[0042] The chess environment 20 includes a plurality of versions of
chess including all the most common variations, for example Blitz
with time controls ranging from one minute upwards. The environment
20 is also configured to allow competition chess, for example chess
tournaments and/or leagues, in addition one of games between
members.
[0043] Members of the chess network 10 are allowed to set-up games
in which at least one participant is a computer competitor. Such
games are allowed as long as the nature of the computer competitor
is fully disclosed. Computer competitors will, however, be
prohibited from playing against human participants in game
variations having strict time controls, such as Blitz or the
like.
[0044] Access to the chess environment 20 is provided by a
graphical user interface 30 implemented using any suitable
graphical tool compatible with the player nodes 12. Typically, for
example, the user interface 30 comprises a website including a
plurality of web pages for accessing various features of the chess
environment 20.
Membership
[0045] Membership of the chess network is strictly controlled. All
prospective members wishing to join the chess network 10 are
required to go through an online application or verification
procedure.
[0046] On application to join the chess network, prospective
members are required to supply a verifiable e-mail address and to
choose a username and password. The user name and password form the
basis of a new membership account. Prospective members may also be
required to provide appropriate personal information, for example a
terrestrial mail address, contact telephone number etc.
[0047] Prospective members are then requested to enter a current
numerical chess rating based on an internationally recognised
system, and verified either from another Internet chess site such
as the Internet Chess Club (ICC) or the like, or from a recognised
body such as the United States Chess Federation (USCF), or the
Federation Internationale des Echecs (FIDE) also known as the World
Chess Federation. An example of an appropriate rating system is the
`EIo` rating system created by Arpad EIo, which is a recognised
method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in
two-player games of skill such as chess.
[0048] Where the prospective member's chess rating cannot be
verified the claimed rating is provisionally accepted for
subsequent verification during the prospective member's initial
games, subject to a minimum rating. Where a prospective member
cannot provide a chess rating based on a recognised system, a
suitable provisional rating is assigned, indicative of an `average`
low entry participant. Typically, for example, a rating of 1200
would be appropriate for such a participant. By comparison, under
the USCF's rating system, the average rating for a club player was
originally targeted at 1700. It will be appreciated, however, that
any suitable rating may be selected and that a provisional rating
may be assigned based on replies to a series of appropriate
questions, for example, "How often do you play chess?", "Do you
play in a club?", etc.
[0049] The chess environment 10 is provided with an internal rating
system based on the EIo methodology. However, whilst most
organizations use an EIo based system, each uses a different
variation thereby resulting in differences in the rating attributed
to a player having the same results. Any rating entered is
therefore normalized against the internal system of the chess
environment 10 and an appropriate internal rating generated.
[0050] Any prospective member wishing to use the real money area is
also required to supply debit or credit card details with an
address that corresponds to the credit card billing address, to
provide verification of age.
[0051] On completion of the application, the prospective member is
required to acknowledge reading and understanding the sites terms
and conditions before being registered as a member.
Ratings
[0052] An unverified provisional rating claimed by a new member, or
the rating assigned to the new member, is validated over a
pre-determined number of games, typically twenty, although ten
would be adequate to establish an accurate rating. During rating
validation, the activities of the new member within the real money
area are restricted. For example, the maximum wager made by the new
member may be limited for games in which the new member takes part.
Such a maximum wager may be set at for example to $30.00 or else
may be zero for one or more games and may vary with games completed
using the environment
[0053] The new member may also play virtual money games and/or
money free games to establish a validated rating. A verifiable
rating from another Internet site or recognised body is still
validated but over a smaller pre-determined number of games,
typically ten, although as few as six may be adequate to establish
an accurate rating.
[0054] Validation is achieved by comparing the performance level
expected if the current rating is accurate, with the actual
performance over a series of games. Where performance falls short
of the expected rating the rating is lowered accordingly, where
performance is better than expected the rating is increased.
[0055] A simple equation for the modification of ratings is:
R'=R+K(A-B) where R' is the modified rating, R is the current
rating, A is the actual score in a game or over a number of games
(1=Win, 0.5=Draw, and 0=Loss), and B is a virtual score predicted
by the relative ratings of the participants in the game. K is a
constant, which sets the maximum adjustment for any individual
game. Typically, for example, K will be 16 for grandmasters and 34
for weaker participants. Other adjustment mechanisms are also
possible.
[0056] A player's predicted `score` for a particular game is given
by: where R-i is the rating of participant for whom the score
calculated, and R2 is the rating of their opponent. It will be
appreciated that ratings adjustment and predicted scores can be
calculated separately for each participant using the above
equations.
Odds Calculator
[0057] The chess environment 20 is further provided with an odds
calculator 34, for automatically determining a return for wagers
placed by participants. In operation participants making use of the
odds calculator 34 are provided with proposed odds for a particular
game based on their relative current ratings, which competitors in
a particular game may either accept or adjust by mutual
agreement.
[0058] A game may be set up either with a fixed prize fund, or a
fixed stake. In fixed prize fund games, the size of the prize fund
is decided by mutual agreement of the participants. Each
participant is then required to contribute to the prize fund, in
dependence on the odds provided by the odds calculator. Thus, a
participant having a particular rating contributes less to the
prize fund than a higher rated opponent and vice versa. By agreeing
the prize fund the loss to each participant is limited.
[0059] In a fixed stake game, a member wishing to play a game for
money sets up a game via the user interface, places a stake in the
prize fund, and elects to use odds calculated by the odds
calculator. When another member wishes to participate in the game,
odds are calculated for the game in dependence on the relative
ratings of the participants. The member wishing to join the game is
then required to place a stake in the prize fund in dependence on
the calculated odds. Hence, the size of the prize fund will vary in
dependence on the rating of the member joining the game. The member
initiating the game may limit the risk of loss by setting
appropriate qualification requirements for entry to the game, for
example limiting entry to members having a maximum rating of 200
above that of the initiating member.
[0060] As seen in FIG. 3, for any particular game the odds
calculator 34 is configured to:
[0061] (a) Determine the numerical rating for each participant at
36;
[0062] (b) Calculate a likelihood of a win, a draw, or a loss at
38;
[0063] (c) Generate fixed odds for wagers between participants in
games at 40;
[0064] (d) Determine a return for a stake value proposed by a
participant at 42 or 42'; and
[0065] (e) Generate an adjustment to the actual rating of each
participant at 44 dependent on the result of the game.
[0066] At 36, the numerical rating determined for each participant
comprises either the current actual rating recorded for the
participant in the chess environment 20, or a virtual rating. A
virtual rating is generated by the odds 34 calculator, based on the
actual rating of the corresponding participant and any handicap or
other parameter adjustment made to bias a particular game against
or in favor of the participant.
[0067] At 38 the odds calculator 34 calculates a likelihood of a
particular participant winning based on the following equation:
[0068] where R1 is the rating determined for the first participant,
R2 is the rating determined for the second participant, and P1 is
the calculated likelihood of the first participant winning, taking
account of the possibility of a draw. The equation for determining
the likelihood of winning may also be represented as:
P1=B-<1>A(B-B<2>)
[0069] where B is the player's expected score as defined above.
[0070] The likelihood of the first participant losing is given
by:
[0071] The likelihood of the player losing is also calculable as
the likelihood of the opposing player winning using the above
formulae, where B has been calculated for the opposing player.
[0072] The likelihood of a draw is given by: or else by:
D1=B-B<2>
[0073] At 40, the odds calculator automatically determines an
appropriate set of odds based on a comparison of the likelihood P1
of the first participant winning, with the corresponding likelihood
P2 of the second participant winning. Thus, it is the relative
ratings that are used to determine appropriate odds, rather than
absolute ratings. Alternatively or additionally the odds may be
determined automatically, based on a direct comparison of the
ratings determined at 36.
[0074] One method of converting the likelihood into odds is by way
of a tabular system, in which a two-dimensional array of odds is
generated for given probabilities or ratings. One example of such a
table is shown in FIG. 4. The rankings are banded into discrete
ranges between a minimum and maximum value such that the array is
defined by a series of rows and columns. The columns represent the
bandings for a first player and the rows represent the bandings for
the second player.
[0075] In FIG. 4, it can be seen that the rating values between 700
and 2,500 or more have been arranged in bands of 100, resulting in
a table of 19 rows and 19 columns. Greater or lesser bandings may
be used as appropriate.
[0076] The table of FIG. 4 is populated with odds values but it
will be appreciated that the table may instead be populated with
conversion factors in order to allow the odds to be calculated. A
given banding for player one will specify a particular column and a
given banding for player two will specify a particular row,
resulting in a single odds value for the match.
[0077] The diagonal line of cells marked `evs` indicates evenly
matched ranking between players, whilst the remaining cells
indicate odds n favor of one of the two players. It will be
appreciated that the upper half of the table of FIG. 4 has not been
populated since the values in this half of the table will mirror
the values shown in the lower half.
[0078] By way of example, a game between participants having a
rating difference of 200 generates odds in favor of the weaker
participant of around 9/4, whereas a rating difference of 1000 may
result in odds of 5/1 or higher depending on the method used.
[0079] The precise odds generated will depend on: the maximum odds
allowed for a member to member game; and a maximum rating
differential between participants above which the odds are capped.
For example, if the odds are limited to a maximum of 10/1, and the
maximum rating difference is 1500, the odds generated for a 1500
differential or greater will be 10/1, whilst the odds generated for
differentials between 0 and 1500 will be spread over the range
evens to 10/1.
[0080] A tabular system as shown in FIG. 4 provides a beneficial
way of calculating odds since the required variance in odds over
the required spread of ratings can be represented as a line on a
chart as required and the table can be populated with values taken
from the line. Thus the shape of the line can simply be modified
and the table values adjusted to take account for specific rules or
criteria. In the example of capped maximum odds, the line may tend
towards an asymptote or else the odds may be represented as a
straight line which is simply cut off at the predetermined maximum
odds.
[0081] In addition the size of the bands can be increased or
decreased as required to improve the accuracy of the odds
calculation.
[0082] In an alternative to a tabular system, the odds can be
calculated using formulae. In a simplified embodiment, this can be
achieved by calculating a ratio of the probabilities of winning. If
the resulting odds are greater than a predetermined maximum value
then the maximum allowed odds is presented to the players in place
of the actual calculated odds. An alternative function, such as an
inverse exponential or logarithmic function, may be used so that
the odds tend towards the required maximum value in an asymptotic
manner.
[0083] Turning back to FIG. 3, at 41 a decision is made on whether
parameters relating to a wager between the participants are to be
calculated based on a fixed stake at 42, or a fixed prize fund at
42'.
[0084] At 42, the calculated odds and a fixed stake value Si
proposed by a first participant, are used by the odds calculator to
calculate a return Z1, Z2 due each participant in the event of a
win, a total prize fund value WVOT, and a stake value due from the
second participant S2.
[0085] The return Z1 due to the first participant is generated,
taking account of any fee F1 imposed on the first participant by
the provider, as follows:
Z1=Q-(S1-F1)HS1-F1)
where the calculated odds against the participant winning are
Q/O2.
[0086] It will be appreciated that the fee F1 may comprise a
percentage of the stake value S1. The fee F-I may, for example, be
10% of the stake value. Alternatively it may be fixed.
[0087] Thus, the opponent is required to place a corresponding
stake value S2 in the prize fund which is sufficient to cover the
calculated return and any fee F2 imposed on the opponent.
[0088] To cover the return due to the first participant, the stake
value S2 required from the opponent, to fulfill the calculated
odds, is therefore given by:
S2= -(S1-F1)+F2
[0089] The fee F2 may, for example, comprise 10% of the stake value
S2. Alternatively it may be fixed.
[0090] The return Z2 due the opponent is thus:
Z2=Q-(S2-F2)+(S2-F2)
and the total prize fund Wr0T is given by:
WTOT=Z1+Z,=(S1+S2)-(F1+F2)
[0091] The odds calculator is further configured to generate stake
values S1, S2 and returns Z1, Z2, for both participants at 42',
based on a fixed prize fund value WFXED proposed by at least one of
the participants, and the calculated odds:
S1=W1 - -(S1-F1)+F1
and;
S2=WFLXED-Q-(S2-F2)+F2
[0092] After the stakes/returns are calculated the participants are
free to play the associated game during which the odds calculator
awaits completion of the game at 43.
In the event of a draw the prize fund is returned to the
participants in proportion to their respective contributions,
unless an agreement has been made to the contrary. For example, the
participants may agree that in the event of a draw or stalemate the
weaker player wins the contents of the prize fund. The fees F1, F2
are retained by the provider.
[0093] At 44, on completion of the game, the chess environment 20
pays any winner the contents of the prize fund and the odds
calculator generates an adjustment [Delta]R-i, [Delta]R2 to the
actual rating of each participant in dependence on their
performance in the game. A suitable method for adjusting the rating
has been described above under the subtitle "Ratings".
[0094] In addition to the above described methods of implementing
the present invention, an alternative working embodiment has been
devised which is in many ways preferred. This alternative
embodiment takes account for the actual wager or bet made on a
potential game. A modified rating can be determined by adjusting
the rating calculation defined above in accordance with the actual
stake, S1. The modified rating or `Bet Rating`, BR' can be defined
as follows:
BR'<=>R'*(Si/Snormai)
[0095] The modified rating BR' is used in place of the rating R' in
order to calculate a player's likelihood of winning (P1) losing
(L1) or drawing (D1) a game in accordance with the equations
defined above. Given a stake of Sj the return or payout, Z, for the
player at the end of the game would be dependent on the
probabilities of winning or drawing as follows:
=[1-P1)X-S1+S,
Zdraw=+---x-S1+S1 where Zwin is the payout for winning and Zdraw is
the payout for drawing. The likelihoods of winning, drawing or
losing and the associated returns can be calculated in a similar
manner for the opponent using a suitable modified rating, BR' for
that player. The likelihoods, odds and potential winnings may be
reported separately to each participant. A losing player receives
nothing in return for their stake.
[0096] It will be appreciated that the odds calculator need not be
used as part of the chess network, but may instead be provided as a
standalone calculator for calculating the odds in any chess game.
The odds calculator may, for example, be used by bookmakers to
derive odds in a chess tournament or the like. The standalone
calculator may be implemented as a software application on a
computer or as a separate electronic calculating device.
[0097] It will be further appreciated that FIG. 3 relates to just
one example of how a particularly advantageous part of the odds
calculator may work. In another embodiment, a player may have a
number of ratings associated with different types of game. For
example, a player may display a greater or lesser level of skill
dependent on whether they are playing one type of game, such as
timed blitz games, as opposed to another game type, such as
conventional chess. In such an embodiment, the calculation would be
carried out for a type of game selected by the participant or else
may be calculated for all game types such that a user can compare
odds for various games at once and then select the desired game
type to initiate a game.
Handicapped And `Equalised` Games
[0098] In addition to conventional chess game variants, the chess
environment 20 is also provided with variations of chess designed
to level the playing field between participants having a high
rating and those having a much lower rating. The variations include
handicap chess and Equalized Chess.TM.. Handicapped chess is
relatively well known. It involves the artificial weighting of a
game in the favor of one participant (usually the weaker
participant) by imposition of a `handicap` on the opponent before
commencement of the game proper. After the handicap has been
imposed the game proceeds under normal chess rules. There are
various forms of handicap that may be imposed, for example the
removal of selected pieces of the opponent before the game
commences, allowing the weaker participant to make additional moves
at the start of the game, etc. Hence, where participants have very
different ratings, the stronger participant may allow the weaker
participant to remove selected pieces from the board and/or to play
additional introductory moves, to improve the chances of the weaker
participant winning. It will be appreciated that other forms of
handicap are possible.
[0099] In order to cater for handicap games, the odds calculator 34
is further configured to generate virtual ratings for participants
electing to play under a handicap, for example, by removing at
least piece before the start of a game. The virtual ratings may
then be used to generate alternative odds based on a comparison of
the virtual rating of the handicapped participant with the actual
rating of their opponent.
[0100] The nature of the handicap may be decided arbitrarily
between the participants in the game. The odds calculator 34,
however, is also provided with means for generating an appropriate
handicap based on the relative ratings of the participants
[0101] The chess environment is also provided with a new chess
variant, Equalized Chess, in which the parameters of the game are
adjusted in dependence on the relative ratings of the participating
players to make it easier for the weaker participant to win.
Typically the parameters required for the weaker participant to win
are adjusted advantageously in their favor. Accordingly, one
purpose of Equalized Chess is to allow players of differing skill
to play a game with a similar chance of winning.
[0102] Typically, for example, an `equalized` game will set a goal
for the weaker participant to achieve before the stronger
participant achieves checkmate. If the weaker participant achieves
either checkmate, or the goal, they are classed the winner. The
goal may, for example, be to take a pre-determined number of
pieces, to take pieces to a pre-determined value, or to leave the
stronger participant with less than or equal to a predetermined
number or value of pieces.
[0103] Alternatively or additionally the goal may be simply to draw
the game or to achieve a stalemate.
[0104] Constraints are placed on the goal to avoid unfair biasing
in favor of the weaker participant.
[0105] The constraints may include a limitation on the type of
pieces that are eligible for contributing to achievement of the
goal, for example the contribution of pawns to each player's tally
may be included or excluded completely. Alternatively, pawns may be
included but only if the differential in the number of pawns
between the participants does not exceed one, thereby ensuring that
the weaker participant has to attack premium pieces as well as
pawns. For example, where the equalization goal set for the weaker
participant is the accrual of a certain number of points, the
contribution from captured pawns will be equal to the number of
pawns captured from the stronger participant.
[0106] The constraints may alternatively of additionally include
provision of a final chance for the stronger player to achieve
checkmate on the turn immediately following the turn in which the
weaker player achieves the equalization goal. If the stronger
player does achieve checkmate on their turn, they are classed as
the winner. Accordingly, a goal is not deemed to have been achieved
if the opposing player achieves checkmate on a move immediately
following the move on which the predetermined number of chess
pieces have been captured or else a preset combined value for
captured pieces has been reached or exceeded
[0107] A suitable constraint may also be to limit the time
available to each player to make a move in the game. Thus the
stronger player may be required to make their move in a shorter
time period than the weaker player. For example the stronger player
may be given 1 minute per move, whilst the weaker player is given 5
minutes per move.
[0108] In one embodiment the odds calculator 34 generates the
`equalization<1> goal automatically when an `equalized` game
is initiated, based on the relative ratings of the participants.
The goal is set such that the virtual ratings of the participants
are approximately equal, allowing the participants to place wagers
at even odds. The equalization goal is based on the likelihood
generated by the odds calculator 34, and numerical values assigned
to each piece. The numerical values may, for example, be the
established standard values: Queen=9; Rook=5; Bishop=3; Knight=3;
and Pawn=1.
[0109] `Equalized` games are typically only available to pairs of
participants whose ratings differ by more than 200. Whilst the
above described system does allow for a simple implementation of
Equalized Chess, it has been found that the differential between
the two players' ratings alone may not provide sufficient
information for determining a suitable `equalized` game. This is
because rules for a game of Equalized Chess which are suitable for
players having skill ratings of 500 and 1000 respectively are
unlikely to be suitable for players having skill ratings of 2300
and 2800 due to the increased ability of the players. In addition,
any inaccuracy in the ratings and hence the odds calculated for a
game could result in a significant advantage being handed to one
player.
[0110] In an alternative embodiment, a system is provided that can
balance and adjust to constantly ensure that in every game, players
have an equal or sufficiently close to equal chance of winning.
These odds may not remain static over time either, for instance as
the game becomes more popular and people adapt their playing style
to suit the new rules, so too the odds may vary to maintain the
equilibrium. Accordingly the rules are calculated by taking account
of the skill rating of one player as well as the differential
between the players.
[0111] This embodiment makes use an of an array or matrix of odds
containing values representing the likelihood of a player being
able to survive varying numbers of moves or else being able to take
or retain varying numbers of pieces. These arrays are referred to
as a matrix of move odds and a matrix of piece odds. Both matrices
operate according to the same principles and so only an example of
the move odds matrix is described in detail below. It will be
appreciated that `equalized` games may rely on any or any
combination of the goals or constraints described above and is not
limited to the use of any one variable. For example a similar
matrix system may be used to determine suitable time constraints
for each player
Table 1
[0112] Table 1 shows a simple move odds matrix. The vertical axis
or first column contains the rating of the lower rated player and
the horizontal axis or first row contains the rating difference
between the two players. Each of these criteria is split into
bands, the size of which may be adjusted as necessary. In this
example, a skill rating or differential which falls between the
upper and lower limits of a band would be considered to fall within
the band represented by the lower band value. The matrix contains
details of the number of moves which an average player of that band
would be expected to achieve for a given skill rating differential
between players.
[0113] For example, 1425 player would be placed in the 1400 band
and a rating difference of 215 would be adjudged to be in the 200
band, such that a predicted number of moves of 24 would be
returned.
[0114] The use of this allows feedback of the results of the game
into the odds calculation so that the next prediction can be made
more accurate. In the example above, the 1425 player may have
survived for 24 moves and won the game and in that instance the
system should raise the required number of moves to give the higher
rated player an improved chance of winning in an ensuing game.
[0115] FIG. 5 shows a worked example of how this self-balancing
might work. The scenario demonstrated is that two players with a
rating difference of 260 points play a series of 10 games,
alternating colors. The assumption is that the initial odds are
inaccurate and in favor of the lower rated player and so over the
games played the odds adjust to give the stronger player a more
even chance of winning. When we reach the point where the players
are winning equally the odds to stabilize and not continue to
adjust, it will be appreciated that the players are alternating
colors and so the relevant adjustment is made to alternating white
and black players in the final two columns of FIG. 5.
[0116] Thus it can be seen that when a player achieves the goal
that they set for a game, an incremental change or adjustment is
made to any or any combination of the player rating, the likelihood
of them winning a subsequent game, the constraints placed on each
player and/or the goal to be achieved in the next game. Rating
calculations have been included so that it can be seen how the
players move into different odds bands as their ratings change,
although in this particular embodiment, the details of the rating
calculations are provided as an example only and are not relevant
for the odds calculations.
[0117] With a system that automatically adjusts to equilibrium, the
accuracy of the starting values are less crucial to operation of
the system. However initial values have been chosen in the
embodiment of FIG. 5 such that initially any lower rated players
need to survive for 25 moves or capture 15 points to win the game.
Within FIG. 5, it can be seen that the rate at which a player's
goals are adjusted are fixed between games. However the rate of
change can be modified in other embodiments such that it is a
variable that can change as a function of a players performance. In
one such embodiment the rate of change of the game parameters or
goals could be based on how many games have been played in a given
band cross-section by a particular player. This offers an
indication of how quickly a player is improving.
[0118] In addition, it would be possible to adjust the odds or game
parameters by relatively large increments in the beginning with a
view to reaching an equilibrium point quickly and then adjust
slowly as more games are played. This could be implemented simply
by reference to another matrix containing the game count for each
band combination so as to return a scaling factor or else a limit
to the adjustment values between games
[0119] The algorithm used for choosing the move odds is the same as
that used for choosing points odds and so only one is described
here for conciseness. However it will be appreciated that the
points odds can be determined either on the basis of pieces taken
in a game or else on the basis of pieces remaining on the board at
the end of the game or after a predetermined number of moves.
[0120] A two-dimensional array or matrix is maintained where for
any two combinations of player ratings it is possible to look up
the required number of moves that the lower rated player needs to
make to win the game. The number of moves, M, required for a win is
therefore a result of lookup function of the ratings of the two
players, F, and is shown below. M=F (R1, R2)
[0121] This lookup function locates the move odds in the maintained
matrix. Based on the result of the game an adjustment to the move
odds is calculated. At this point a variable, Y, is introduced to
control the speed of adjustment. This may be calculated at each
game dependent on several constants and the number of games, N,
played between players of similar ratings.
Y x N
Y=max\Ym mimi,' m''<l>i<m>nU I'''
m<Iu>a<a>x<A>'<''>N stable where Ymin and
Ymax are pre-selected constants representing the minimum and
maximum allowed adjustments (for example, 0.1 and 2.0), and N
stable is a pre-selected constant representing the number of games
that need to be played before the move odds are considered
stable.
[0122] Once the adjustment speed variable, Y, has been calculated,
the adjustment to the number of required moves depends on which
player won the game and if the game was won due to reaching the
requisite number of moves. The four possible outcomes are shown
below.
[0123] High rated player wins=>-Y applied
Low rated player wins=>no change Low rated player wins on
moves=>Y applied A draw=>no change
[0124] After the game the adjustment is fed back into the system to
alter the required number of moves, M1, for the next game as shown
below:
M1=M+A
[0125] This can be repeated to calculate the number of moves after
another game, M2, by simply incrementing the game count, G, and
using the result of the most recent game
M2=M1+A1
[0126] Such incremental changes to game parameters also provide a
stimulus for players to continue playing against an opponent
despite a defeat.
[0127] Whilst the above embodiment, refers to the use of a single
matrix, it is possible to use multiple matrices in determining the
relevant `equalization` handicaps and also for determining the
adjustment to the ratings and game parameters for subsequent games.
For example, a dedicated matrix or array may be used for each
individual player.
Setting Up Game
[0128] The user interface 30 is provided with a game set-up area 60
configured to allow an initiating member to set-up a game for
participation in by another member, as seen in FIG. 5. In the
Internet based chess network 10, the game set-up area comprises a
web page with dropdown menus, dialogue boxes, and the like arranged
to provide the desired functionality.
[0129] The game set-up area 60 is provided with a game creation
region 62 comprising a plurality of drop-down menus configured for
the creation of a new game. The drop down menus include a game type
menu 64 configured to allow the initiating member to select the
game type (for example Blitz, Handicapped, `Equalized` or the like)
and whether the game is to be a real money game, a virtual money
game, or a money free game.
[0130] A user has the option of selecting a timed game such as for
example a `Blitz` game such that the user can input a desired
length of game or else can choose from a selection of predetermined
game lengths. Timed games of this type have been found to be
beneficial in reducing the opportunity for either player to cheat
during the game. In addition there is the possibility of using
software having algorithms designed to identify player activity
indicative of cheating.
[0131] The game creation region 60 is further provided with a prize
fund menu 65 for allowing the initiating member to select an
appropriate real/virtual financial prize that an opponent will
receive on winning a real/virtual money game. The prize fund may
comprise a fixed value prize fund to which both participants
contribute, either in relation to their relative ratings using the
odds calculator 34, or otherwise by mutual agreement, when an
opponent decides to join the game.
[0132] Alternatively the initial prize fund may represent a wager
comprising a stake that the initiating participant is prepared to
pay to an opponent who wins. When an opponent joins the game they
propose a stake they are willing to pay the initiating member if
the initiating member wins. If accepted, the prize fund is
increased by the value of the opponent's stake and the game can
commence. The winner of the game wins the prize fund less any
administrative fees or the like imposed by the provider.
[0133] The game creation menu also includes: a time control menu 66
for setting timing controls for time limited games such as Blitz or
the like; a play menu 68 for selecting the initiating participants
color; and a qualification menu 70 for setting the
preferred/required rating of the opponent.
[0134] The qualification menu 70 may be used by the initiating
member, to limit participation in the game to competitors meeting
certain pre-requisites, such as ratings between a certain minimum
and maximum. For example, participation may be limited to members
having a minimum rating equal to that of the initiating member and
a maximum rating of 350 greater.
[0135] In operation, a member makes appropriate selections to set a
game up. Once the game is created, the initiating member awaits
another member to request entry to the game as an opponent,
proposing an addition to the prize fund if appropriate. If the
initiating member accepts the request, the game can commence.
[0136] The game creation region 60 is further provided with a game
request box 72, to allow a member to request a game from another
specific member. The member making the request is required to enter
means for identifying the specific member, for example the member's
username.
[0137] To assist the member making the request to find the specific
member, a search link is provided to allow access to simple search
field. The member making the request is then allowed to use the
search field to search by appropriate identification details, for
example, by partial username and/or email.
[0138] It will be appreciated that although drop-down menus are
described, the functionality can alternatively or additionally be
implemented using any suitable web controls, for example, data
entry boxes or the like.
[0139] The game creation area 60 is also provided with a game
history region 74, which displays information relating to the past
performance of the member accessing the game creation area,
directly to their user interface 30.
Selecting Existing Games
[0140] The game creation area is also provided with a game
selection region 76 comprising a searchable list of games that are
awaiting participants. A member searching for a game can browse the
list looking for games, which meet their own requirements. The list
may be filtered or sorted to assist searching.
[0141] The list entry for each available game includes a game
identifier comprising a unique number or alphanumeric code for
identifying the game. The list entry also includes the initiating
member's user name and rating, any preferred qualification
requirements, the game type (e.g.
real/virtual/handicapped/`equalized` etc.), the initiating member's
color, and any time controls. The current prize fund is also shown
along with the status of the game.
Game Play
[0142] As seen in FIG. 6, the user interface 30 is provided with a
game play area 80 for allowing members to participate in real-time
online games with other members, guests, and/or computer
competitors.
[0143] The game play area 80 is provided with a player region 82, a
spectators region 84, and a player information region 86. The
player region 82 is the area where the chess game is conducted, and
includes a virtual chessboard 90 and associated virtual pieces, a
game info area 92 displaying information about the current game,
and a communications area 94 for recording the games history and
for allowing competitors to chat to one another during the
game.
[0144] The game info area 92 includes the game identifier, the
initiating member's user name and rating, any time controls, the
current prize fund, and the status of the game.
[0145] In operation when a game is set-up, the initiating member
waits for another participant to request entry to the game, and the
status is shown as "Awaiting Player". Once another member has
requested entry into the game, and any wagers and game conditions
are agreed, the member making the request is accepted as an
opponent. The prize fund is then increased to include the
opponent's wager, the game commences and the status is changed to
"In Progress".
[0146] The participants in the game move the chess pieces on the
board in accordance with standard chess rules and any other agreed
rules on game conditions or game play.
[0147] The communications area 94 comprises a commentary/chat
dialogue box, in which each valid move is recorded as it is made.
If an invalid move is attempted, the participant making the move is
prompted that the move is illegal, and the affected piece is
returned to its original position. Participants can also chat with
each other using the chat dialogue box if they wish.
[0148] The player region 82 is further provided with a timer 96
showing the allotted time the participant has to make their move.
As soon as one participant has made a move the other participant is
alerted using any suitable alert means, for example an alarm or a
flashing screen. A similar alert is also provided to warn a
participant that time is running out for a particular move.
[0149] The player region is also provided with a flip board button
98, a raise stakes button 100 and a take a break button 102. The
flip board button 98 allows the participants to flip the board, in
operation, for example to view the position from their opponent's
perspective.
[0150] The raise stakes button 100 allows participants to raise the
prize fund in the game by an agreed amount. The button 100 becomes
available at a pre-determined interval, for example on every tenth
move and on every fifth move thereafter. On selection of the
raise-stakes button a new window is provided in the user interface
30 of the participant who selected it. The new window allows the
participant to enter or select an amount, which they propose to
raise the prize fund by.
[0151] Once a proposal is made for a raise in the prize fund, the
opposing participant is prompted to accept or reject the proposed
raise. If the raise is accepted the prize fund is increased
accordingly. Where participants agree to use the odds calculator
34, the increased contribution to the prize fund, by each
participant, may be dependent on their relative ratings.
[0152] The Take a Break button 102 is configured to become
available for games having time controls allowing longer than sixty
minutes per move. Selection of the button 102 allows participants
to suspend the game and to come back later to complete their move.
When, in operation, the button 102 is selected, the game is
suspended and the participant whose move it is allowed to return at
another time to continue. When the move is made an electronic
communication is sent to the opponent indicating that the move has
been made. The opponent can then return to the chess network, sign
in, and make their move. If the opponent is already signed in, and
within the relevant game, they can either take their move or select
the Take a Break button 102.
[0153] A game can end for any of a plurality of different reasons
including: the failure of a participant to make their move within
the time allocated for the move; failure to make a move in a
suspended game within a pre-determined period, for example 14 days;
deliberate forfeiture by a participant; and conventional chess
finishes including stalemate and checkmate. Where a game finishes
due to the failure to make a move, the participant whose turn it is
forfeits the game. A participant can also decide to forfeit a game
by selecting a Give Up button 104 provided for the purpose, and on
a resulting confirmation prompt confirming their intention to give
up.
[0154] The player information region 86 is provided with a join
game button 106, which is available for selection when the game is
awaiting a participant. In operation, a prospective opponent
entering the game play area 80 selects the join game button 106 to
request entry to the game. This generates information about the
prospective opponent in the player information region 86, for
review by the initiating member who set the game up. Several
prospective opponents can be listed in the player information
region 86.
[0155] The initiating member is then free to decide which
prospective opponent, if any, they wish to accept the request for
entry from. For each prospective opponent, the player information
region 86 is provided with an accept button 108 and a reject button
110, to allow the initiating member to make their decision.
[0156] Prospective opponents are removed from the list in the
player information region 86 when they are rejected, when they
leave the game play area 86, or when the initiating member accepts
the request for entry of a different prospective opponent.
[0157] The spectator region 84 is only available to
non-participants in the game. Web-controls are provided in the
spectator region 84 to allow spectators to watch a game that is in
progress and to chat to one another. A list of spectators viewing
the game is provided in the spectator region 84 to allow spectators
to interact with one another.
[0158] It will be appreciated that game play has been described in
simple terms and that a skilled person would be able to implement
other useful features that are common to online chess games. For
example, the participants may be provided with controls allowing
them to change the initial board set-up, to add/remove pieces
during game play by mutual agreement, to set up chess problems for
solving by other members etc. Such features would also be
beneficial in allowing members to tutor and train other members.
Other features may include features to allow cosmetic changes to
features such as background color, piece style or the like.
[0159] It will be further appreciated that many features described
will be subject to statutory restrictions in certain jurisdictions
and that such features will only be accessible to the extent that
national law allows in the jurisdiction of a user wishing to
benefit from those features.
* * * * *