HalfPawn: Courtside is easy enough. It is the King's court, eh?

Since you won you did OK:-) And since you won from a much inferior position after the late middlegame you did better than OK....:-)

HalfPawn: Does that site have other games on it? I wouldn't mind playing a game or two Embassy Chess or Dark Chess live.

If you can make the connection to the royals being on one side I would think you'd not have much trouble with the rest of the court being on the other side. Least ways that was the connection I was making. I suppose Cardinal side would work or Marshall side, but that's not consistant with royalside since you'd be naming one side for two pieces and only using one piece for the other side. None of it matters much as long as the people you're talking know what it is that you're talking about. Avoiding confusion is the main thing.

Can anybody see why white would resign in this game:
http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=1370112&i=35

Because i played with a low time frequency.... I've had around 5 days to move if i recall correctly so Smirf resigned....
It's my fault and it's not my fault! I play slowly and i feel sorry about that (and i can't do nothing for that) but i don't feel responsible about the decisions of others....
Smirf wants to play quick, i was playing quick at the most part of the match, but from a period and then when i started to be very busy, i was playing like a turtle for 2-3 moves and for my last move i've made 5-7 days to move and Smird didn't like that so he quited.....

Beren the 32nd: The game was played with a very long thinking time. Nevertheless the time moreover had been extended by automatic vacation. When additionally noticing, that Pythagoras played other games during that 'vacation', I preferred to terminate that game by resigning. Even though his behaviour is conform to brainking rules, I am not motivated to continue games under such conditions. So you have the chance to gather points by following his example.

Thankyou both for answering. I found your other finished games quite interesting to play through.

They were very interesting and i wanted to attack to Smirf's King.....

Pythagoras: That must have been a very tired wish ... facing SMIRF's huge advantage.

SMIRF Engine:
Huge advantage????? In what game are you refering to? Black one or white one?
In white game i would win clearly. In black game i had the small advantage although the game was definitely complicated....!
If you say huge advantage due to Smirf's evalutions i have proven before that Smirf's evaluations and generally computer's evaluations in that kind of games i create in 10x8 Chess variations, are worthless.
Remember that in our first black game Smirf believed it had even a +5.000 or more points advantage, but i knew clearly that i will win like i did....

Hey, the Gothic Chess board is getting interesting again!

Pythagoras: If you really would be able to clearly win as you claim, you should do it in a fair way. Else nobody will understand your strange behaviour.

Fwiffo: Yeah, but don't hope for a fight to start between Reinhard and me! I'm a huge fan of Smirf and i fully support Reinhard in what he does(at computer game programming) and there is not even a tiny chance to start fighting with him.....
I just disagree with him sometimes....

SMIRF Engine: If you really would be able to clearly win as you claim, you should do it in a fair way. Else nobody will understand your strange behaviour.
1st: I don't understand the "fair way". Why i wasn't fair?
2nd: Also it was not my fault that we would not know the result of these games as it was not me that resigned.....
3nd: Why my behaviour is strange....?

Pythagoras: Well, I am almost tired to repeat myself. You should actually know, what turns me down.

Fwiffo: There is no such board in BrainKing. The current regime doesn't like retrograding :)

WhiteTower: That's what I was thinking too.

No gothic chess anymore? Does Ed know already?

Fwiffo: I'm know he does.

Want to play a couple of games of Embassy Chess?

Is Grand Chess also ok? I know you are a master in that game too, and I don't like the 10x8 variants so much. I'm not a good chess player however, I hope you don't mind.

Fwiffo: I'm no master at either of them. My best game is Dark Chess, and as good as I am at it I still don't consider myself a master. I do like to play them both.

I'll delete the Embassy Chess invitations and send some Grand Chess ones in their place. Is a 3 day time OK, or a Fischer clock? 1.6 14.1?

Does anyone have any thoughts about which is normally the best side to castle on in Embassy chess?
In standard chess, it is much easier to castle on the king-side, so queen-side castling is more unusual. However, in Embassy chess there are more pieces on the king-side instead, but does this make queen-side castling better to aim for? Maybe it is better not to castle at all!?

Beren the 32nd: It depends on ...

In 10x8 chess (especially in Capablanca Random Chess) there are games more often than in traditional chess, where castling could be skipped. Eventually it could be a small help to decide, by looking, where your King would have less near (developed) opponent pieces. But that will be only one hint.

Beren the 32nd: I'm certainly a lot more cautious about castling. The extra diagonal moving piece (Cardinal) lessens the advantage of moving your King to the flank. Plus the Cardinal himself is a very good piece at harrassing the King, especially when he can trap him in the corner. Other times it pays to castle if you can get the Rook into play. It's hard to combine castling and getting the Rook to the file you need him on. So often times I don't castle and just move the Rook. If you survive the middle game it's good to have your King centered, so this is one reason to not castle. It can be a long walk back to the other side from castling. I go along with SMIRF Engine and also add how you think the Pawns might look later in the game. If they're going to afford some protection from an attack, then castling towards them can help the defense.

My 101 all games tournament

HalfPawn: Maybe, what time frame? But no sorrow, current private beta version probably will not been given to download as done prior, and the spreaded version will expire end of March. Up to now only 10 Euros have been donated for my SMIRF GUI + Engine as a donationware. So there could not be a huge user crowd after this month. If SMIRF, it must have been an old version. Current SMIRF would have played much superior and surely won.

It's just a couple moves into the game, but it does seem playable. It goes well for Black at first, but White doesn't seem too hurt. I haven't had an opponent not accept the gambit, but that's an option too.

1 P D2-D4_______ P D7-D5
2 N B1-C3_______ P C7-C5
3 P×P D4-C5_____ P D5-D4

Is this sound? I'll keep trying it as Black unless I get spanked as bad as when I tried a regular Queen's Gambit with the White pieces in Embassy Chess. I doubt if I'll ever have the White pieces as I don't like starting the game moving the Queen's Pawn.

Walter, do you mean 1.f2-f4 f7-f5 2.Nh1-g3 g7-g5 3.f4xg5? This would be a queen pawn opening in Embassy Chess. One nice thing about having a Gothic Chess board it is gridded and makes it easier to adapt to the larger board. Otherwise I find myself wanting to use the 8x8 chess coordinates as well! I would think that white probably should develop instead of taking the Gambit, with 3.Bg1-d4 and an interesting variation might be 3...,Nh8-g6 (removing the attacked Knight with tempo) 4.Ji1-j3 (pinning the knight and placing pressure on black's center)4...,g5xf4? (Greed) 5.Ng3-h5 e7-e5 6.Bd4xe5 Ng6xe5 7.Nh5-g7++ although this is hardly forced.

Nice to get an analytical discussion going. I wonder if this would be a good spot to try to annotate games or the blog that Fencer suggested when I wrote to him when I first became a "Rook".

Sorry, Walter my brain really misfired on this one. I read embassy chess, but was still thinking in Janus! :-) This dawned on my as I was working out on my exercise bike after posting the message below. The Gambit looks like a good way to disrupt white's game in Embassy.

panzerschiff: Yes, not Janus! In Embassy Chess the files A through E are the set up just like regular Chess. When I tried a Queen's Gambit with White a few weeks back it did not work as the Bishops on the courtside are shifted over. The one I'm talking about in this instance does seem to work and the courtside Bishop for Black will come in handy the moment he can move the G file Pawn forward and guard the advanced D file Pawn. Plus if White moves his Knight to E4 Black can move P F7-F5. This make White spend another move. As good as this looks, I still am not sure it's a good thing. I've noticed that pushing the Pawns out in these larger board games can come back to haunt you. Targets for your opponent. It could go like Alekhine's defense sort of, just with the colors reversed.
This opening might work in Grand Chess too. I doubt if it comes up in regular Chess as not too many people would move the Knight there on their second move with White and block the C file Pawn. I don't think it would work in Gothic Chess as the Kings are shifted one square and the check threats need to be there for Black.

HalfPawn: Not the SMIRF I play. It does something like that and I expect to be losing shortly.

HalfPawn: There are different opinions to piece average exchange values. Current SMIRF values will equalize: R+B+P/3 == Q, so it will depend on additional positional effects, whether such a trade will be recommended or not. To call such trades "dumb" is without any argument. Normally such a trade is not deciding the outcome of a 10x8 game.

P.S.: Another proof for the experts being here. If you really should be interested in testing the real SMIRF, you simply should play serious games with it.

Walter Montego:

Returning to that gambit and this time thinking Embassy Chess. :-) After 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 c5 3.dc5 d4 maybe 4.Md2 putting a little pressure on the advance pawn. If 4...Nc6 5.g3 g6 6.Nb5 Qa5 black may hold things together as perhaps would the more natural/risky(?) 6...Md7 7.Bxc6 bc6 8.Cf3 cb5 9.Cxa8 Bb7.

Entertaining, but maybe only for speed chess might be 3.Bf4 cd4 4.Qxd4 Me6 5.Cf3 Mxd4 6.Cxd4 with the threat of Cb5+, or in the real realm of jokes 3.dc5 d4 4.Bf4 dc3 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 6.0-0

Also on the material discussion below, we chess players tend to be a little too materialistic. Those values are only guidelines and not absolutes and a piece's ultimate value is how well it is placed for the developing battle and how quickly it can be used. That was always the tricky part in computer programming, coming up with the proper algorithms for valuing space and time and many other intangibles. Anybody out there as old as I am remember how dumb and greedy those first chess playing computer were that you could buy? Fritz 9.0 has come a long way from that!

HalfPawn: Let's watch again average piece value proposals. There are two known relevant number sets: a) within SMIRF, b) within Gothic Vortex.

For me it seems to be better implemented acually within SMIRF, watching such games like: http://www.exactachess.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=498#498

SMIRF Engine:
How this game is conclusive i don't understand!?!
Conclusive about what? About piece values? I don't see the point....

Pythagoras: Sometimes captions will give you a hint. Here: if "dumb" moves are sufficient to start a discussion on piece values, it would obviously make more sense to discuss other programs instead of SMIRF, discovering SMIRF being that superior.

SMIRF Engine: .
.
.
I don't understand nothing from what you said!
Anyway i have the feeling that you believe i've said that Smirf plays dumb trades. It wasn't me that said that. But anyway if you want my opinion Smirf makes bad trades. Very bad ones. Of course i don't claim it is doing them often or not i just say it does them from time to time. And i believe that it would be stronger if it didn't make that bad trades....

Pythagoras: Indeed SMIRF still is a beta. Because it is my first playing serious Chess program, there still a lot of weaknesses are within it. Watching the SMIRF project one easily could notice that progresses will be made. But SMIRF's strength actually is already sufficient to fear no 10x8 opponent program. Thus it is not on SMIRF to change its evaluation model.

SMIRF Engine: .
.
.
I have watched the Smirf progress at 10x8 variants all these years and i've said, as you know, that i'm just impressed! You are doing a hell of a job with it that's why i wish you to continue with it and forget all these GO-thing.
The most interesting thing about Smirf for me is its ability to play, always speaking about 10x8 Chess, the opening with a non-computeristic way! It doesn't play the openings like a human but not like computer too. If you leave a computer alone in the opening it will screw up the game. Not Smirf! I guess this has to do with your approach.... Of course many many weaknesses are there in the opening play too but not as many as in all the other 10x8 programs i know....

I guess that Smirf's strength (that was the case in the latest Smirf beta i can play with) at 10x8 variants is sufficient for having no fear against the other programs. But i'm sure you don't speak about 8x8 Chess variants, right?
For example and since you are the only one that can test it, how it can do against Spike 1.1 at FRC?

About GO: Yes the GO-programming world is still unexplored and many innovative ideas can be implement. This obviously will give to the GO programmers the sense of a mystery, that they're swimming into uncharted places with many discoveries waiting them. And this is true. But considering the difficulty of GO-programming i don't think it's a good idea to abandon a successful project like Smirf and dive into the unknown......

.
.
.
The prize it's a Fencer's gift and not mine. But since i had the right to create such a tournament i did it.

The winner will receive a 6 months Rook membership. It's an Embassy Chess tournament.
The tournament.

Pythagoras: "For example and since you are the only one that can test it, how it can do against Spike 1.1 at CRC?"

P.S.: Everyone could download SMIRF and test it, it is not restricted until the end of this month.

Actually I do not play much 8x8 games against other programs. But because of the results from some special test sets, SMIRF's 8x8 strength seems to be somewhere around 2600 Elo.

Actually SMIRF has come to a stage, where a complete redesign would make sense. But there are very few fans supporting the SMIRF project but much more critics. So I am unsure to take that task.

Oops i meant FRC and not CRC of course.....

A big number of fans unfortunatelly, come after a success of a program....

But the MOST DISCOURAGING factor that prevents Smirf to come in the front of the stage is:
The lack of UCI ability! I understand your reasons and i somewhat agree. That's why i wish ARENA to support 10x8 Chess variants. If that would happen i guess you immediately implement UCI support for Smirf. But.....
On the other hand, although making a UCI Smirf for Chess only, would hide it's ability to play 10x8 CRC too, it would give the opportunity to people to make tests with it and the result would be to become well-known....

HalfPawn: As far as I know I am no longer welcomed at gothicchesslive. During the last big GC event there end of 2005 there have been difficulties to rebuild broken games, if both players would not sufficiently cooperate. I preferred to resign then instead to play endless kindergarden games. My attempt to make a proposal how to fairly handle such unlikely situations had been ignored. Instead I have been called someone, who would leave tournaments, if it would not go his way. The truth is, that any victory or loss is losing any worth, if not gained fairly. That is also the reason, why I have resigned some games here at brainking, even though mostly having advantage.

My SMIRF has been available unrestrictedly until end of March. Everybody was able to test and compare it with his own program. That has not been possible for me. No actual 2006 version of ChessV or Gothic Vortex could be used by me for testing purposes. This is showing to everybody, where the fear is residing.