Aganju: I can't say I recognise the combination, even replacing the drops by move-from,, but it's certainly a very good one!

Walter Montego: About dark chess: I would have thought it one game that can only be played at a site like this one, with a computer as an arbiter to show each player the illuminated squares. How could this variant be played on real boards? (I suppose 2?)

Justaminute: On another subject for the same variant: does anyone know how the system here handles a double check? does it count one or two checks?

It has potential. It looks a mess, but there are probably some strategic ideas that need to be applied, such as "take in such a way as to maximize the number of available moves for yourself, minimise those for the opponent" (seems reasonable) or things that need figuring out such as "go for the queens first" (or maybe should it be knights?) difficult to analyse.

Lightbug: Concentrating on defence in this variant is probably the worst tactic. The offence wins almost always.

Atomic Chess (Walter Montego vs. Pedro Martínez)
Whatever the outcome, the current verdict on 1.h4 is "unproven either way".

WhisperzQ:
reckless abandon is rewarded and minions get to carry on their meaningless lives while their generals' fragility is exposed

You've provided a perfect description of loop chess

DarwinKoala: You're forgetting conversions. even in regular chess there's a theoretical possibility of 9 queens. Here too.
In loop chess conversions are far more common, parachuting pawns on the 7th row happens all the time.

Theoretically - a lot, but that's just like saying you need 9 queens in regular chess to account for all the possible conversions. In practice it's rare to see more than 4 knights bishops or rooks of one colour, but say you need 8 of each, so you can sell more pieces :)

Justaminute: Actually currently the most common cause is that two chess bigshots find it in their common interest to have a draw outcome, then go through the motion of having such a repetition early in the game to avoid the wrath of the referees.

nabla: As I recall the repetition rules were never implemented in the code here, you have to ask the admin (Fencer) explicitly to end a game.
The reasons were: first, it's very complicated to implement, since repetitions may concern moves that are not consecutive; second because that's how it's done in regular chess tournaments anyway: a player has to inform a referee that a 3rd repetition has occurred. And now you have discovered a third reason: the rule doesn't necessarily make sense for variants :)

Walter Montego: That program exists. It's called brainking.com.

What do you know, after all these years, something unclear
In Los Alamos chess, can a pawn convert to a Bishop?

coan.net: That's funny, somthing must have changed. I hunted for draw examples, here for example: Behemoth Chess (Gror vs. Mal 4 Inara)
Seems the same type of move

So far some 800 games ended in a mate, that is a blocked position. The shortest one I found is Massacre Chess (mangue vs. emelin) in 19 moves.

WhisperzQ: The limit for the longest is obvious.
Not so for the shortest. Who can come up with the shortest game? (truly ended ones, of course. Don't bother with the timeouts-on-move-1, resigned or draw without reason)

Subsidiary theoretical question: who can come up with an initial position that can lead to a blocked game in the shortest possible number of moves? I have a trivial one that blocks after move 8, black.

FromHell: They play other variants on fics now? it's been a while since I visited it. I think it was only bughouse and suicide, then.

lukulus: Just for the fun of it, I've built one:
black: Ka8, Rb7, Bb8, pawns a7, b6, c7.
white: pawns on a6, b5, c6, king somewhere. black to move.

Don't ask me how the black bishop got to b8 :)

No idea there. As I see it, it would work just as well without an exception for kings. So kings could, for example give check - as long, of course, as the other king isn't protected by a knight. But since it's a rule change, it would be a separate variant.

ughaibu: it's explicit in the rules: "Any piece (except a king or a knight) which is guarded by a knight of the same colour..."

And by the way, the exception for the knight seems silly.

Karthum:
1 is possible, but would make a new variant. What happens if the opponent has only a king left?

I doubt the utility of (2), the situation should arrive only very rarely. I don't think I've ever had the situation.

WhisperzQ:
right, I totally missed that aspect :)

I've invented a new variant, I call it "Fencer random chess". It carries a certain element of luck. The game is played on a 8x8 chessboard, usual pieces, standard starting positions. moves are identical to regular chess, but capture is prohibited, so the number of pieces remains the same throughout the game. Since the captures are eliminated, the usual target which is the enemy king is no longer the object of the game.

So how is the game ended? simple: After each move, A Fencer random generator, at a probability to be determined, posts a message "white has won", "black has won" or, at a lower probability "draw".

The advantages of this variant should be obvious. The strategic calculations, which are so exhausting in the other variants of chess, are greatly reduced here. Anyone can easily master the techniques involved (OK, I have doubts about some members, but you can't have everything)

In my humble opinion, this game should become very popular on this site, in view of the quality of the other recent additions.

mangue: The pawn rule is a part of the draw rule for regular chess: the game is declared a draw after 50 moves without neither a piece capture nor a pawn move.

This rule should be seen as an extension of the more easily comprehensible 3-times-repeated-position rule. The idea is that after 50 moves without an essential change to the board nothing more is likely to happen. The pieces are just dancing around.
So why the pawn clause? because a pawn move IS an essential modification: it is not reversible.

By the way, for regular chess the debate about this rule is still open, because there are endgame position which are known to be won, but the way to the win takes more than 50 moves. For example, K+N+N against K+P.

Whether all this is pertinent to dark chess is another point.

WakeUpPeople: Immortality for kings? even limited? not likely to get a support from France!

coan.net: as in any game where skill and chance are mixed, your stats and BKR has only meaning when a large number of games are played. you'll never have 99-1 results in backgammon, for example. if you have 60-40 it is already very significant.

mangue: JinkyOng is playing a couple of games currently. if he doesn't wipe the floor with anything brainking has to offer, that settles it as negative.

Salkkuman: definitely. and the same goes for the "delete game" techique!

grenv: You can't do that in any case, Ed would bounce on you with a lawsuit.

andreas: no, that's crazyhouse, or almost, because crazyhous has a different rule from loop chess concerning promoted pieces. Bughouse is very different, it's a 2 against 2 game played on 2 boards.have a look Here for the rules.

is waiting for your participation Here.

one week total think time.

Doerdich: you can also "go back in time": click on a move or use the backwards/forwards buttons to see what was revealed at a certain moment.

using the "notes" field is also very helpful in this variant.

WhisperzQ: sorry, I don't know. the table in the link only states the expected result, not the means to achieve it.

Pedro Martínez: draw.
see http://www.matf.bg.ac.yu/~andrew/suicide/StanGold/etables.htm

but apart from that, that's an idea for a new variant: you can take also your own pieces. for normal chess, this is idiotic, but for loop chess? sacrificing a piece to parachute far behind enemy lines? what do people think?

Sumerian: so far, in this variant, you can't take your own pieces, so that's out.

Sumerian, danoschek: "it's chess..." well, no, it's not. it's a variant, which has a different set of rules. it says in the rules the only change is the possibility to extend the board so that it loops on itself. it follows that the only limitation to a rook move is that there be no pieces between the starting and ending point.

Sumerian's infinite regression is no obstacle, since there is the 3 move repetition draw rule.

hmmm... actually that's the way out of this loophole: when the rook starts the move, there IS someone standing on the target square: himself. question is, does this count as an obstacle, since the rook has to move out of it's starting position to reach the obstacle, which is therefore no longer an obstacle? this is starting to enter quantum physics... or in dano's favorite expression, humbug. for once I agree

danoschek: I'll oogh you! halma?
ok, ok, I take it back. my Kindergarten days are over, too

danoschek: not in all games. in checkers, you can have multiple jumps that end up where you started. in cylinder chess I see no reason why it should be disallowed. it comes to a "pass", but so what, if no rule forbids it?

Caissus: winboard/xboard manages fine the pgn used here. In windows you have to modify the shortcut to have the flag
winboard.exe /variant=crazyhouse
the only problem with this interface is that it doesn't show the pieces off board, which is VERY annoying for this variant

Any interrest in loop chess? a tournament will start next monday, provided enough people show up... click here

apparently not, hrlqns won. good game!

not clear from the rules: what happens if no black pawn can move? is it a draw, like stalemate?
(or white for that matter, but I really don't see how that can happen)

thanks. no offence, but white still needs a LOT of help from black to win :)