@@dawidwojacki5049 And there is that one video where he won one and lost two games, but multiplied -100 percent twice, which is completely not how win rates work…
I wonder if that bishop capture in the first game was because the opponent didn't realize the left to right rule is reversed from his perspective so he thought you couldn't recapture
The drawback applies from your opponent's perspective, doesn't need a brain, your opponent wouldn't just think of it from your own perspective, plus it is obviously the right of the opponent's king so the opponent themselves
Honestly, revealing the drawback is based. It was only boring when you didn't count the games where the oppoment was a chad and also revealed their drawback.
No, as the actor, I am not getting paid, we are unpaid actors instead Simp, if you are seeing this, I promise I wont reveal our secret if you let my family go
@@sleeper6548 sad news your family is no more with simp infact no more with the world. So be careful before revealing yourself next especially if it's related to simp
@@Chomta [Auto Generated Comment In Case Of Emergency] If you are reading this, this means Simp has finally pulled the trigger, but before I go, I'd like to say Simp is a fraud /j
We must remember not to question Simp's math, he's never been wrong and he would never contradict himself just to get us to comment and get engagement... Right?
Simp addressed that rumor in a previous video and explicitly said they're not a woman, so unless Simp just lied, that's unfortunately not the case. It was still absolutely my favorite theory about this channel for a while, though!
Anyone else notice Simp blundered the first game on move 1? The opponent could have moved Pawn forward, Queen or Bishop Bottom Left, Capture Pawn, Capture King. There were just enough moves. Because Simp had to always move 1 right, he could not respond to pieces on the left in any way, hence free king capture. Edit: I misinterpreted the challenge as '1 Square to the right' however forced checkmate is still possible.
I think stalemate is normally impossible in this variant since you can move you king into a check. So this scenario is only possible with certain drawbacks, so it is always a win. EDIT: It is possible if you box the king in with protected pieces that not attack the king, I guess it would still be a win
I assume with "protected pieces" you mean pieces you are not allowed to move to because of the rules? Yes, that would be a win via drawback. Being forced to break the rules of your drawback is an instant loss, and that includes if you are forced to violate your drawback because your drawback took away all legal moves.
Game 1: Literally cannot lose the game if you lose a piece on the h-file and another piece on any adjacent square, and then walk your King all the way over there. You could shuffle back and forth between two Haunted squares forever. Very convenient set of opponents. All true Chads who great at math and who reveal their drawbacks to keep things fair.
@@pepejuanmolaman889 In all technicality, sure. But in Drawback Chess, you must actually capture the King to win the game. Just trapping the King isn't good enough here. So, a "checkmate" position has no value if the target king can just shuffle back and forth between a couple of haunted squares, never emerging onto squares where it could be captured.
Isnt game 1 lost if the opponent stuck around? Knight g4 and white cant do anything If defend mid pawn with d3, queen takes on h4 with check, and white has nothing to block, and after moving the king, black can just move next to the king and white cant take back.
Was that really a forced move at the end of the last game? Couldn't they have taken the bishop with the king, or does the site consider a king to be of lesser value than a bishop?
I had to reread that drawback a few times cuz i thought the same. It is worded very unintuitively but "capture a piece with a piece of equal or lesser value" means the capturing piece needs to be the same or smaller than the captured piece if possible. So yes that bishop capture was forced, as king takes bishop would be capturing a piece with a piece of greater value
They had to capture a piece WITH a piece of equal or lesser value if they could. It was possible for them to capture a bishop with a bishop, so they couldn't capture one with a king, precisely because king has greater value.
Kings have infinite value in drawback chess, but even if it were 3.5, he still couldn't take the bishop because the bishop has a lower value (3) than the king.
I have a doubt about the second game, the drawback of the oponent. In late game if they go to a stalemate position, in normal drawback chess the king have to move and then be captured and lose. But with this drawback he can't move his king, so is a real stalemate drawback? Or is a lose cause he can't move anything?
It isn't, King in Drawback website is 3.5, bishop is 3.0; so bishop is lesser value. I also have no clue why the opponent decided to take Simp's white bishop and ignore the black bishop threat... Must be racist /s
You could theoretically win by using second-best moves and setting up a double checkmate. Not entirely sure how Stockfish would decide which checkmate is "better," but it should allow you to do one or the other.
@@magnetsphere2872 I do, yes. Wouldn't expect anyone to actually pull that off ever, but theoretically possible. More realistically though, you just hope your opponent's drawback has a lose condition
Yeah, but unironically, I stopped watching these because the drawback reveal makes it too grating for me to watch in many cases. I would like it if they had a button on the site for “offer to reveal drawback if opponent also agrees to reveal”, or “forgive opponent drawback”, but if you must reveal drawback, do it only if you think the drawback is easy or only after a certain turn or number of pieces are captured or something.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
You keep lying that the win rate has always been 100%. Please edit it to reflect the truth: 'Win rate has always been 100% or higher'.
Lol, you had me in the first half...
Winrate is below 100% because Simp has already lost a couple of games, but he can't do maths
@@dawidwojacki5049 Simp is Asian, I am fairly sure he knows how math works.
@@dawidwojacki5049 How dare you doubt an Asian in math
@@dawidwojacki5049 And there is that one video where he won one and lost two games, but multiplied -100 percent twice, which is completely not how win rates work…
"that blunders the entire game"
lmao xD
But Simp
100%+100%+100%=300% win rate
100% * 100% * 100% = 100%
@@daotrongkhanh1205 Or is it 1000000%³ ?
@@NWRIBronco6 100% is 1, 1^3 is still 1
@@Saturlen but %=0.01 so %³=0.000001
@@Galinaceo0 *Exactly. And since 1%³ = 0.000001, that means 1000000%³ = 1.*
at this point I want Simp to loose 3 games in a video just so he can teach us how that maths into 100% winrate.
[(-1)+(-1)]×(-1) is 1 in Boolean algebra
A) (-1) ^ [ (-1) + (-1) ]
B) [ (-1) * (-1) ] ^ (-1)
C) (-1) ^ [ (-1) - (-1) ]
D) [ (-1) * (-1) + (-1) ] !
E) { [ (-1) - (-1) ] * (-1) } !
F) (-1) - (-1) - (-1)
I wonder if that bishop capture in the first game was because the opponent didn't realize the left to right rule is reversed from his perspective so he thought you couldn't recapture
This is a really good point. Maybe the rule should be rephrased to describe it by “ascending files”, or something similar?
The drawback applies from your opponent's perspective, doesn't need a brain, your opponent wouldn't just think of it from your own perspective, plus it is obviously the right of the opponent's king so the opponent themselves
This series where he reveals his drawback would be so much easier if he didn't reveal his drawback smh
Honestly, revealing the drawback is based. It was only boring when you didn't count the games where the oppoment was a chad and also revealed their drawback.
Definitely paid actors
No, as the actor, I am not getting paid, we are unpaid actors instead
Simp, if you are seeing this, I promise I wont reveal our secret if you let my family go
@@sleeper6548 sad news your family is no more with simp infact no more with the world. So be careful before revealing yourself next especially if it's related to simp
@@Chomta [Auto Generated Comment In Case Of Emergency]
If you are reading this, this means Simp has finally pulled the trigger, but before I go, I'd like to say
Simp is a fraud
/j
Complaining about people complaining about your testosterone? That's not very testosterone.
i believed his unlack of testosterone, i feel so dejected
We must remember not to question Simp's math, he's never been wrong and he would never contradict himself just to get us to comment and get engagement... Right?
It's clearly a ploy to get us to discuss his drug intake.
He doesn't know how to count to 5
3/3 opponents revealed this video. Radiating testosterone
"That blunders the entire game" - My opponent every time I move a piece
You won all games out of 3. All=1 (All for one and one for all) so it's 1/3, or 33.33% winrate. Trust me, I'm a mathematician.
But are you Asian though?
Man, ad revenue must be so massive you can hire entire horde of paid actors 😃
100 rated chess but you have to checkmate by castling
Simplifier is probably the most exploitable drawback
You know it would be really funny if after all that talk about testosterone and so on, it turned out that Simp is actually a woman
Simp addressed that rumor in a previous video and explicitly said they're not a woman, so unless Simp just lied, that's unfortunately not the case. It was still absolutely my favorite theory about this channel for a while, though!
volunteering actors
I know the drawbacks play havoc with the usual rules, but that is STILL the first time I have ever seen a King actually be taken!
Anyone else notice Simp blundered the first game on move 1?
The opponent could have moved Pawn forward, Queen or Bishop Bottom Left, Capture Pawn, Capture King.
There were just enough moves. Because Simp had to always move 1 right, he could not respond to pieces on the left in any way, hence free king capture.
Edit: I misinterpreted the challenge as '1 Square to the right' however forced checkmate is still possible.
MATHS: you should play at 2233, 2267 and 2300
Huh, shouldn't it be 300% Win-Rate?
Why he reveal challenge I am complain
t e s t o s t e r o n e
He's not a coward
so much testosterone that he's been playing drawback chess for years when it's not even one year old.
Good morning everyone, we're back at 'Good morning everyone'.
Bro changed the title and thought we wouldn't notice
Another 100% in the bag ggs
Revealing drawback sure spices things up, because most times you can abuse it somehow^^
I think stalemate is normally impossible in this variant since you can move you king into a check.
So this scenario is only possible with certain drawbacks, so it is always a win.
EDIT: It is possible if you box the king in with protected pieces that not attack the king, I guess it would still be a win
I assume with "protected pieces" you mean pieces you are not allowed to move to because of the rules?
Yes, that would be a win via drawback. Being forced to break the rules of your drawback is an instant loss, and that includes if you are forced to violate your drawback because your drawback took away all legal moves.
I was worried that in 2nd game Simp would autoabort game
Game 1: Literally cannot lose the game if you lose a piece on the h-file and another piece on any adjacent square, and then walk your King all the way over there. You could shuffle back and forth between two Haunted squares forever.
Very convenient set of opponents. All true Chads who great at math and who reveal their drawbacks to keep things fair.
You can get checkmated even if you are on a haunted square right?
@@pepejuanmolaman889 In all technicality, sure. But in Drawback Chess, you must actually capture the King to win the game. Just trapping the King isn't good enough here. So, a "checkmate" position has no value if the target king can just shuffle back and forth between a couple of haunted squares, never emerging onto squares where it could be captured.
Isnt game 1 lost if the opponent stuck around?
Knight g4 and white cant do anything
If defend mid pawn with d3, queen takes on h4 with check, and white has nothing to block, and after moving the king, black can just move next to the king and white cant take back.
Isn't the maximum rating you can put in the Welcome! box 2000? For higher rating games you might need to build up rating on the same account.
I keep forgetting that you use TTS. You're really good at it. 👍
8:01I thought king has a higher value than bishops
Wow, there's no stalemate in drawback chess?
Edit : nvm, simp talks about it immediately afterward
it's because.the objective is to take the king, not checkmate
Was that really a forced move at the end of the last game? Couldn't they have taken the bishop with the king, or does the site consider a king to be of lesser value than a bishop?
I had to reread that drawback a few times cuz i thought the same. It is worded very unintuitively but "capture a piece with a piece of equal or lesser value" means the capturing piece needs to be the same or smaller than the captured piece if possible. So yes that bishop capture was forced, as king takes bishop would be capturing a piece with a piece of greater value
They had to capture a piece WITH a piece of equal or lesser value if they could. It was possible for them to capture a bishop with a bishop, so they couldn't capture one with a king, precisely because king has greater value.
Yes, King is 3.5 - although on here I believe it is the most valuable piece
You should really pay your actors
In the last game, when you value the king with 3,5 then couldnt he just take with king?
Kings have infinite value in drawback chess, but even if it were 3.5, he still couldn't take the bishop because the bishop has a lower value (3) than the king.
I have a doubt about the second game, the drawback of the oponent. In late game if they go to a stalemate position, in normal drawback chess the king have to move and then be captured and lose. But with this drawback he can't move his king, so is a real stalemate drawback? Or is a lose cause he can't move anything?
5:53 ok that answer the question xD
They are NOT PAID actors
Win rate - 300%!
I miss I'M BETTER THAN MY VIEWERS
UHM, EXCUSE ME, didn't you mean THREE HUNDRED PERCENT win rate instead?
Testosterone complaint
paid
In that last game can't you just go 1.e4 d5 2. exd5 c6 3. dxc6 Qd6 4. cxb7 Qe7+ 5. bx... Qxe1?
Is the bishop higher value than the king?
It isn't, King in Drawback website is 3.5, bishop is 3.0; so bishop is lesser value.
I also have no clue why the opponent decided to take Simp's white bishop and ignore the black bishop threat... Must be racist /s
@@-Shiro_ Kings actually have infinite value. Mentioned in the rules.
what is the rating of a grandmaster again?
Your math at the end was wrong. You won 3 games. 100% * 100% * 100% = 1,000,000%
Paid actods
Simp has too much testosterone, i'm starting to feel insecure.
sad to say, too much testosterone can always be a bad thing
Still cant believe there is a drawback that is literally pretty much "chess, but you cant win"
Im talking about drawback that says can make best moves
You could theoretically win by using second-best moves and setting up a double checkmate. Not entirely sure how Stockfish would decide which checkmate is "better," but it should allow you to do one or the other.
Do you hear how ridiculous what you just said actually is xD
@@magnetsphere2872
I do, yes. Wouldn't expect anyone to actually pull that off ever, but theoretically possible.
More realistically though, you just hope your opponent's drawback has a lose condition
Yeah, but unironically, I stopped watching these because the drawback reveal makes it too grating for me to watch in many cases. I would like it if they had a button on the site for “offer to reveal drawback if opponent also agrees to reveal”, or “forgive opponent drawback”, but if you must reveal drawback, do it only if you think the drawback is easy or only after a certain turn or number of pieces are captured or something.
where testosterone?
Are you sure, you really want to see simp's testosterone...? 😅
6:40 Couldn't you move the H pawn to h6, thus forcing the queen to capture the H pawn, letting you capture the queen with your rook?
I want this comment to be shown in the next video, please.
aww ye i'm part of the early people
0 views 13 seconds ago, chess simp fell off
These are some interesting drawbacks 🤌
0 views 13 seconds ago, chess simp fell off