Sam has closed his piano and gone to bed ... now we can talk about the real stuff of life ... love, liberty and games such as Janus, Capablanca Random, Embassy Chess & the odd mention of other 10x8 variants is welcome too
For posting: - invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu or for particular games: Janus; Capablanca Random; or Embassy) - information about upcoming tournaments - disussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted while that particular game is in progress) - links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)
When pawns are promoted, are there any new trends developing as to favorites, or are players still favoring Queens, over Chancellors or Archbishops, perhaps due to their abiding insecurity about the new pieces' versatility and/or staying power?
Note: I intend to imply a relationship between the apparent inherent speed of development in any position and the necessity of considering the chances that, since the very character of the position may well change rapidly with the advent of a Chancellor or Archbishop upon promotion, perhaps their value should be accordingly adjusted (up!) over the alternative of adding (even a second!) Queen.
Comments welcome! /Fx/
P.S. Is it time to think of a new name for "queening"? Would something like "crowning" or "electing" or "raising" catch on? I suppose we can forget "knighting" right away! (Or...should we?!) They talk about someone having been "created Cardinal" on a particular day. Could a pawn be "created Chancellor" or "created Archbishop"? That could be abbreviated "c/C" or "c/A," instead of "p/C" or "p/A".
The Queen is still the most "powerful" piece, so unless there is a positional consideration that favors a Chancellor or Archbishop, one should still promote to a Queen. Of course, if you can promote without your opponent being able to promote, any one of the three would grant you a winning advantage.
P.S. Pawn "promotion" is the standard term. Even in 8x8 chess, there are situations where promoting to a piece other than a Queen is the only way to win.
Underpromotion is what the term is called in chess, which would be promoting to a knight since this is the only piece that a queen cannot move like. It stands to reason that in Gothic Chess that if you underpromote it would be the Archbishop for the same reason. It makes no sense to promote to a Chancellor or any other piece since the Queen already has that advantage.
The reason for underpromoting would be to deliver a check when promoting the piece (Knight or Archbishop) or winning a piece with a fork thereby giving you a winning or drawn game that promoting to a Queen would not of given you.
题目: GothicChessPro and his old friend, chesscarpenter,
Gentlemen,
It is an honor to be counted among such esteemed company as yours, and it is my sincere hope that such pleasant and reasoned discourse may prosper and increase.
I am contemplating the significance of promoting to a Newpiece in leiu of a Queen, and not merely for its immediate effect, but for what follows thereafter. Sometimes the game continues for more than a few moves after promotion, but also, the promoted piece becomes an immediate target. I am thinking about the added element of uncertainty which now accompanies promotion. It seems that the same acceleration that the Newpieces add to the game at large are added to the act of pawn promotion.
I am also curious about the decision to make the new board 10x8. Was there much experimenting done with other formats, or was it a conclusion quickly arrived at because it simply works so well? I have played 4-corner chess with my kids, and it is a real jungle out there! Two other people move after the one that follow your move, so the board changes in wild ways before each move, and there tends to be a r-e-a-l l-o-n-g t-i-m-e between successive turns.
I looked at the website that shows games in action, and the play is exhilaratingly rapid, but that is what the mind needs in order to absorb the spirit of the game.
Surely my observation of games in action will go far to answer my concerns, but it seems I enjoy the wonderment of anticipating consequences and the making of valid generalities. I have always found such pleasure in the moves of chess: wondering what will be coming next; which is near to the heart of mental combinational calculation (computers are heartless!) and the thrill of taking a risk with informed confidence, that one's opponent could not have seen a better move...or could he? It seems to me that it is the learning of when to be sure of one's next move and when to recognize that instinctive voice warning of some vague danger ahead, that makes playing chess (and now gothic chess!) worth the effort.
There is always a thrill to be had when one's play improves, and now with gothic chess, a genuinely new element is added which promises a geometric increase of the very pleasure which makes chess advocates love their game. I expect that by learning both games well, one can use each to expand his skill at the other.
This is the first variant of chess that has held any interest to me, for the others have seemed to be cheap knock-offs of the best game ever devised in recorded history (my own bias). This is different. It's kind of like putting a turbocharger on a hemi. You get more power, and the ride is more exciting. But it's not necessarilly the best format for everyday use. I cannot imagine ever losing my love for chess, and as much interest as I may develop in gothic chess, I expect to always return to the reliable standard, at least from time to time! Having to face a grand prix speedway is more intense than driving down the freeway. But who would want to commute to work every day in a formula 1 car? Okay, some would. /Fx/