I would like to play in the upcoming anti-chess tournament. Anyone looking for a (rusty, but at one time decent) player for their team?

Just a reminder that you need to fix my game. It times out tomorrow.

the fellowship fomento-beraun club needs to players for its anti chess team! newcomers are welcome! tycho and i started to play this game now! :-)

Then I recommend to play it unfixed. I still have no time for it.

It should be fixed now.

Congratulations to Matarilevich, he swept our section and will be playing for the championship. He is also the first person to knock me out of a tournament as I've won every other Dark Chess tournament that I've entered here or on It's Your Turn. You guys in the other section will have your hands full playing him for the prize and championship. I look forward to checking out the games.
Current standings are here:
http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?tri=14869

Since I'm eliminated, the prize is a full year Rook membership. Good luck to all that are left.

As I was knocked out of it a few weeks back, I sent Fencer the money for the winning prize of a year's Rook membership. Today Fencer sent me a message that he'd received the money and took it to the bank. The first round is just about over and the section winners will be playing it off shortly. I'll post their names when it's happening. Good luck to all that are still in.

2004 Second Quarter Open Number 2 Dark Chess
http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?tri=11081#3

I have won the tournament. The last game ended with the King getting draped and had lots of trouble going on during it.
>http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=528354


Thank you to all the entered and played. Thanks for a good match Mely.

Ugh, learn something new about the rules everyday.

In a game, I already have my opponenet checked 2 times, with just 1 more check needed to win the game.

My opponenet just put me in check for the first time, and even though I can move my bishop and put my opponent in check for the 3rd time and win the game (like the rules say), I have to instead get my king out of check. (Which will allow my opponenet to probable now get 3 checks on me)

Are these rules correct?

All normal chess rules apply.

Fortunately two bishops can mate.
Sadly bishop+knight can't.

Also there is no bad corner color bishop, in k+p/k endgames no difference between a/h and other pawns, no chance to draw in kq/kp :-)

i think it would be very usefull for antichess to implant conditional moves;because there are often compulsory series of moves,so games could be played quicker

ahhhhh, the chestnut surfaces again ... Fencer has already spoken on this elsewhere and is strongly against automoves ... so unless he has a significant change of heart it will not be happening.

as i noticed in my games it seems clear to me that you should take care of following in amazon chess:

1) weak points h3/h6 in flank openings
In flank openings (kings fianchetto; kings indian and so on) it is obviously that the classical battery of Bishop e3+Amazon d2 deadly points to point h6 (and black vice versa). i won some games with this strategy.

2) weak pawns h3/h6
i think you must take care with moves as h2-h3 or h7-h6. in classical castling positon a sacrifice of a bishop/knight and then the upcoming amazon often leads to the single mate by the amazon (as we discussed)

3) exchanging the amazons
exchanging the amazons leads to a "normal" chess, and then the stronger chess player is in advantage. in my opinion weaker chess players should not exchange the amazons in general. one example is one game form me against chessik - i think my opponent made a mistake to exchange the amazons.

4) get out the amazons in the opening
in chess there is a rule in opening - do not let out your queen fast! i think in amazon you cannot say that belonging to the amazon, because the amazon can threat much more than a normal queen.

This is a valid point. I have never come across. and doubt I shall. But I don't see why this is not acceptable as with any other promotion.

Fencer, could you explain why this is not acceptable?

In the rules of this game it clearly says The player who captures all opponent's pieces of one kind, i.e. all eight pawns, both knights etc., wins the game. and it also says It is also possible to capture the opponent's king (and that finishes the game immediately since the king is the only piece of its kind). but I am guessing that the loss of a Queen would end the game as well, it being the only one of it's kind. so I would think it should be protected as much as the King. and I wonder as well if I promoted a pawn to Queen would give me two and loosing one would not end the Game If the same would be true of a King. promoting a pawn to a King would Give me two and I could then still loose one and not loose the Game?

Extinction Chess
This game (by the way, great invention of Mr. R. Wayne Schmittberger) follows the same rules as the standard Chess (starting position and piece movement) with these differences:

There is no check or checkmate.
The player who captures all opponent's pieces of one kind, i.e. all eight pawns, both knights etc., wins the game.
It is also possible to capture the opponent's king (and that finishes the game immediately since the king is the only piece of its kind). Because there is no check, a king can move to a square which is attacked by an opponent's piece or make a castling through such square.
Pawns can be promoted to any piece including a king. However, if the player promotes his/her last pawn, loses the game because he/she loses all pieces of one kind - pawns.

you got it, Ramblin. The only possible downside to promotion is by promoting your last pawn, you'd lose the game. I've seen a few cases where selective promotion has won games for people, some to Qs, some to other pieces that were "endangered." Honestly, though, promotion doesn't happen nearly as often as regular chess.

But both of your questions are spot on. 2 kings is no different than 2 queens.

RamblinMan:
Yes, the loss of the Queen does end the game. She is the only one of her kind. I won a game this afternoon by capturing my opponents Queen. The rules should say King, Queen, Two knights, etc., etc. I hope this helps.

promoting your last pawn would be a suicide move. In Atomic, you cannot explode your own king, so I wonder if you can extinguish yourself in extinction.

Anyway, it is very improbable to happen!

I posted nine of them with a two day time limit. Play one game color your choice, or two games of each color. Good luck.

I think that both for white and black the fianchetto opening b3/b6 is very good, because this way they fianchetto the bishop that is on the opposite colour squares from the queen, while the same-coloured bishop can be later used to attack the point h7 (h2) together with the queen (thus this bishop enters the game through the center after e3 (e6)).
Overall, I think the h7 (h2) square becomes a big weakness in cylinder chess, a bit similar to c7 (c2) in standard, for instance. I often attack it with a knight too, after Nh3 followed by Ng5 or Na5.

I often use moves like a2-a4 or h2-h4 (for white), even though I am not really sure about their value ... the pawns are taking some squares from the opponents pieces and they can make the edges of the board a bit less trespassable ... but maybe it just makes me look like I am the active player and that's all :-). Is there anyone else doing these movements ?

there are no edges. assume the king is on a safe side from the beginning, then a4/h4 is the center.

a castled king, which is attacked in "classical" way - g4, h4, opening a line, queen, rook - can be defended by rooks at the "other side (a7, a8) or queen.
i tried sometimes such an attack, but often failed.

Can Horde Chess be salvaged? Personally, I think not. It's not about statistics: it's just about strategy.

White's winning strategy is simple. In essence it's all about deflection and sacrifice. Bear in mind that black's pawns stay on the files they start on unless white allows them to move somewhere else. White needs to clear a path to get behind black's pawn to start eating from the back. So White has to sacrifice to cause those deflections.

White's opening moves setup and execute sacrifices. If the sacrifices are not accepted then captures can force the same thing. Noth these deflect black's pawns diagonally off to both sides of some chosen file. This causes that file to be become more thinly populated by Black pawns. Also pawns on adjacent files need to be deflected away or encouraged to advance so that they no longer protect the pawns (especially the back pawns) on the chosen file and the total number of defenders on that file is reduced. Once the file is chipped away enough, the heavy pieces infiltrate straight along the file - perhaps with final sacrifices to get the queen to the back. It is then a simply mopping up operation working from the back of the horde forwards, just making sure that pawns are picked off in a reasonable order that doesn't allow black any chances of queening or stalemate.

The number of defenders on each file are 3-6-5-7-7-5-6-3. The f-file is my favourite to target though and I may get the h-file en route instead.

Can this strategy be stopped? I don't think so, not with the existing rules.

I think the "classical" attack is still a good weapon here, especially when targeted to h7 (h2) because you can use the diagonal f1-g8 (f8-g1) - such as here .
This is obviously true only when the opponent has castled king side - for some reason, all my oponents do. I do not castle at all.

In fact castling doesn't even connect the rooks, since they are right next to each other to begin with. Castling is almost never a good move I would think.

I agree g3(or g4) is good for releasing the bishop. c2 is not as weak because a3 is a legitamate spot for the knight.

castling, ironically, still has its use as a "suprise move"!

In this game with Alex we agreed draw. But we are discussing if I had a chance to win. What do you think?

looks pretty drawish to me! no sac opportunities left.

I just started an Atomic tournament that should decide the best player when it finallly finishes in about 2010.

Instead, if anyone wants to join mine, it should be over very quickly - one day per move, all welcome. I'll wait for quite a few entrants before starting.

Quick Tournament

Off topic, but anyone playing a game with 'ustica' watch out. He was about to bring me my first loss in this game. Glad I could end the game in a draw. Have a look:

http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=597205

thx grenv, can you wait for me? i'm still a pawn, but i can't wait until 2010 either :)
i'll try to pay up today :)

In a book about games I found this cylinder chess problem:
-------------
White: Ra5, ph6, Kc3
Black: Kb1, pa6, ph7
White to play, mate in 2
-------------
The proposed solution is
1.Ra5-a5! Kb1-c1
2.Ra5-a1++

I haven't tested if this move is possible here at BK yet. My feeling is that it isn't... Truth be told the rules don't exclude the possibility that a Rook (or a Queen for that matter) loops around the board to finish the move in the same position it started in.
Nowhere on the web where I found rules for cylinder chess is this option discarded (nor noted) either.

What do you all think? And if it isn't possible in BK, should it be?

Interesting. I think it´s a legal move because the piece does a move around of the board. The definition of move is independent of the initial and final square but i have never tested it here.

Serious issue. Is a "move" the act of moving itself or rather a process of changing place ? I would think the second option is more correct.
Anyway, the pgn-reading programs will have a difficult time with that problem, I am afraid :-)

There are games where an acceptable "move" is a pass, where the board doesn't change at all... and it is still called a move.
This case is not so radical: the piece does move. Philleas Fog did "move" around the world, even if it ended up where he started ;)

Pafl: I don't see why pgn-programs would have a difficult time with that (but then again I've never used one and am not quite sure even what is is for). I mean, if they're flexible enough to allow moves over the side of the board why not a move to the same position? :) (que ! was not part of the notation, mind you - just my way of showing surprise). Do these programs do any type of validation on the moves made?

hi

oXYgen CZ: hi

anyone having problems castling?

bwildman: What problems?

to bwildman:
The problems which had occurred in a game of mine have vanished.

Sumerian: My king and rook are side by side,my opponant was able to..but I cant.I sent the game to Fencer..I'll post the results

you can't because d1 (target suare for R) is not free

human error ;-)

hello!im wondering if we may play a team game against arimakat ;i think it would be a great opportunity to improve ourselves, providing arimakt's ranking!
everybody is welcome, but experienced players would be better;cu!we will discuss time controls later if enough people interested

redsales:
>stalemate is possible, though unlikely. Eg white king on b2, Black king on a2, queen on b1, another queen somewhere. White to move, if white moves to a1 and black moves the other queen to b2, white is stalemated. Black would have to be pretty dense to do that though!

I don't understand. Why white "can't physically move..!" ?
For example Qb1-g1. Why not........?????

I read all rules before playing a game and my natural ability of instantly finding logical holes in every statement, says for this case that there is not stalemate in this variation as described in Brainking rules......Am i wrong.....?

With stalemate i don't mean there is no draw of course.
Stalemate definition: Stalemate is a situation that a player has no legal moves and he is not in check, and as in this game there is no check, stalemate is a situation that a player has no legal moves.

In the example of redsales the queen of b1 is black. The only piece of the white is the king. White king is in a1 and he is surrounded, so the king in atomic can´t capture and he hasn´t any legal move.

Oh, a black Queen! Yeah, now that makes sense. Then white would be stalemated..........

I have to add that the previous Qb2 move of black wasn't a bad one, since the game was draw anyway......

Chessmaster1000: Not so. With 2 Queens it is simply a matter of forcing the white king to move away from the black king. In this situation:

White king is forced to move
1.Kb2 Ka1
2.Ka2 Qb2 (the one in unspecified pos)

Now white has to move the king away... QED