Oh OK. And one note: The pieces from the site http://h1.ripway.com/sanjaab/bitmaps/ do not appear at all, so in the page you provided for Ambiguous Chess statistics i can't see a board with pieces. I suggest you to put the pieces from the following site(do not click it as nothing will happen):
http://www.marochess.de/php/chesspieces/

And you can choose the desired piece to include in your code for the board position with the following way:
After http://www.marochess.de/php/chesspieces/
put CPn.gif
With:
C = W or B for white or black color piece
P = Q or K or R or B or N or P for Queen or King or Rook or Bishop or Knight or Pawn.
n = a number from 1 to 8 for each piece set that matches your size of the board. Of course if you use 1 for example for black rook then you will have to use n=1 for all other pieces too.....
n=1 is a good choice by the way.....

For example http://www.marochess.de/php/chesspieces/WQ1.gif produces the image of the white Queen from set 1.

And where exactly are the top 10 Ambiguous players in that page? LOL!

nabla:
It's simple:
Take for example the line after After 1.d4 d5:
2.c4 games played = 30, Percentage wins = 93%
2.f4 games played = 6, Percentage wins = 50%

It is not clear at all that 2.c4 is the better move here. You will say but why? It has won for white in the 93% of the games! A huge difference over 2.f4 that wins on only 50%. But this may be completely deceiving.

Consider for example that after 2.c4 and for simplicity's sake, that there are 2 responses to this:
2...X1 that has been played 26 times with a devastating score of 95% in favour of white and 2...X2 that has been played 4 times with a bad score for white of 25%.
2...X1 was the move all people played some time ago, until the new move 2...X2 discovered and been played with a good success for black.
That means we possibly have a refutation to 2.c4 since 2...X2 brings good results for black! Although statistics say 2.c4 has a good %, since many games were played with the bad response for black 2...X1.

The bad thing is the refutation may be deep in the openings-data tree or there may be another refutation to the 2...X2 move later in the tree so 2.c4 is good after all! To solve all these a complete examination of the whole opening-tree should be done starting from the leaves of the tree and going up all the time until we end to the starting opening moves. In that way going backwards(that's the meaning of backsolving) we find the best value(+-,-+, ++-, --+,etc) of each node.....

Note that these statistics should not confuse us about what is better to play or not. I mean that after 1.d4 d5 for example, when we see 2.c4 with a win=93% while with 2.f4 with a win=50%, we should not been deceived and believe that 2.c4 is much better or even better! This may not be the case! In order to know for sure a backsolving procedure should be done.... But i don't have right now time for this. Later....

nabla: .
.
.
Yes unfortunately i didn't know that when i downloaded all the Ambiguous Chess games those currently played was included too....But after a clearance and a re-generation we have these:

For example:
After 1.e4
1...e5 Win%=44 means that black has a score of 44% against white when he plays 1...e5

Starting move
Move Games Win%
1.e4      321      45
1.d4      114     61
1.f4         70     53
1.c4        66     64

After 1.e4
Move Games Win%
1...e5    125      42
1...c5     74       66
1...d5     49      71
1...e6     36      62

After 1.d4
Move Games Win%
1...d5     61      31
1...e6    17       55
1...f5     13       61
1...c5      9       50

After 1.e4 e5
Move Games Win%
2.c4       24       70
2.d4      23        63
2.Qh5   17        58
2.c3      13        38


After 1.e4 c5
Move Games Win%
2.Bb5     15       60
2.c4        10      40
2.d4         6       33
2.b3         6       16
2.c3         6         8

After 1.e4 d5
Move Games Win%
2.exd5    25       24
2.e5         8        75

After 1.e4 e6
Move Games Win%
2.d4      22        36
2.c3       5         40


After 1.d4 d5
Move Games Win%
2.c4      30       93
2.f4        6        50
2.e4       5        60
2.g3       5        40

After 1.d4 f5
Move Games Win%
2.c4        6        33
2.Bg5      2        50


After 1.d4 e6
Move Games Win%
2.e4         7        42
2.Nc3      3        50
2.g3         3        33

For example:
After 1.e4
1...e5 Win%=44 means that black has a score of 44% against white when he plays 1...e5




Starting move
Move  Games Win%
1.e4       634       47
1.d4       245       56
1.c4       144       58
1.f4        131       56


After 1.e4
Move   Games Win%
1...e5     255      44
1...c5     140      61
1...d5      85       65
1...e6      64       60

After 1.d4
Move   Games Win%
1...d5      123      36
1...f5         34      66
1...e6        31      54
1...c5       17       47


After 1.e4 e5
Move   Games Win%
2.c4         50      66
2.d4        43       55
2.Qh5     30       60
2.c3        30       46


After 1.e4 c5
Move   Games Win%
2.Bb5     22        54
2.c4        21       40
2.d4       15        43
2.c3       12        25

After 1.e4 d5
Move   Games Win%
2.exd5     42        32
2.e5        14         64

After 1.e4 e6
Move   Games Win%
2.d4          34         36
2.c3            7         42


After 1.d4 d5
Move   Games Win%
2.c4         59         79
2.f4          11        45
2.e4           9        61

After 1.d4 f5
Move   Games Win%
2.c4         16        31
2.Bg5        6        41

grenv: So you say that in Atomic Chess 8.exd5 should not be allowed for white or even worse 8...Qxd2 with win, should not be allowed for black?

1. Nf3 f6 2. Nd4 Nh6 3. f3 c6 4. e3 d5 5. Nb5 cxb5 6. Bb5 Nc6 7. e4 Ng4 8.exd5 Qxd2 0-1

But that would just be another variation of Atomic Chess different than that we have here.....

nabla: In the first case the game would be inferior i think, while in the second it's pointless since it's just a delay of the loss....

Beren the 32nd: .
.
.
Exactly! Amazing huh....?

mangue: .
.
.
my most beautifoul sacrifice :

Oh holly crap! Many thanks for this!!!!
Although i haven't yet started to investigate the game but with this sacrifice, my brain has built many patterns so it help me a lot....
Now i should observe many more games to help my brain understand what is going on. Please if you have any new brilliancy post it.... And not only you....

nabla: .
.
.
You are concerned about Pawn promotions right?
Hmmmm.... I know as the level increases you will see that more and more games will be decided at Pawn promotions so this could be a problem.

Remember: Chess would not be what it is if there wasn't the Pawn promotions!
Most of the times if you outplay your opponent you will not win immediately by mate but just obtain a material advantage like a Pawn more or Knight for 2 Pawns etc....
So most times you will have to find a way to promote that Pawn or to use your Knight to help your Pawns to promote while your King stops the opposite Pawns or the opposite or just capture tha opponent's Pawns, but the extra Knight doesn't win alone if a Pawn doesn't promote! And most of the times it should promote to a Queen to win.....

So i guess you will need to change the rule one time or another but we will see....

grenv:.
.
.
OK then.... But why do you keep refering to a possible white advantage specifically? I've seen this from others too. You assume that if this game is not balanced and there is one side that has the advantage this side is white.
Why you don't even consider black for having the advantage....?

grenv: .
.
.
No! From the statistics we can only make assumptions that white has not clear advantage. We can't say it with 100% confidence! That's where i disagree.

We can say that: From the statistics we see that the highest probability(we just have an indication) is that white doesn't have an advantage.

But we can't say that: From the statistics we see that white doesn't have an advantage.

mangue: .
.
.
and almost no draw
This is logical since this is a completely new game and no one knows to play it well so there can't be many draws.


Statistics of won games
white 119 (49.79 %)
black 119 (49.79 %)
no clear advantage for white

We can't imply for sure the last statement from the statistics! It is very probable that it is just a coincidence and that as the game evolves and some opening ideas start being created the statistics will change in favour of a color....

But the most important reason is that if we see in a game: White wins: X times, Black wins X times then we can't assume in any way that we have a balanced game, meaning that we don't have an advantage for black or white! We just can't!
Why? Because suppose we have 80 players that played all these X games and the distribution of a single players color at a game is NOT equal, that means he didn't played equal times with white and black.
And let's assume that white has an advantage.
So a single player-stronger than others- could have possibly played more games with black but because he is stronger than others, he won more games than the disadvantage of having the black color would predict....

wetware: .
.
.
Do you think we will live forever? There is not much timeeeee for all these!
Ambiguous Chess is enough for me.....
Hopefully it will not be me that would decide if this new game you propose will be added here....

nabla: .
.
.
I do not only agree with the promotion choosen by the opponent, but i've changed my mind about the castle rule. I think you've made the correct choice....!
And thanks about the history review.....

Crap! Are you the inventor? LOL! Well done....!
So when exactly did you publiced this game and when did you first thought of it and when did you resulted in its final rules?

.
.
.
When this game has been invented or anyway publiced?

Aaaaaaaarghhhhhh! Right now i saw that there is no castling!
This reduces my interest but not by much. Why there is no castling?

Any Ambiguous Chess links with games, or annotated games or strategies about this game....?

With a quick glance at the rules(around 40 sec) i suppose that if i click on e4 then the opponent has to play on e4 my Pawn right?
Hmmmm, interesting game then.

رضا: .
.
.
I was hoping for a different kind of support and you come up with this...?


Oh well, i may hate it less if time will pass....

.
.
.
I protest!
This new light blue(cerulean) colour you put for the Extinction Chess game, is getting on my nerves!

Is there any chance to change it to something more human or should i start getting used to it....?

JinkyOng: I guess you tried to show and prove that your superiority is enough to win even by playing incredibly stupid moves at the opening and losing many tempo's and destroying your King safety at all....
And you succedded in doing that, against all these considered strong players that they have proven to be only some weakies for you, right....?

bobwhoosta:
You win if you capture a _piece_ that causes the explosion of the opponents' King but at the same time doesn't cause the explosion of your King.
This _piece_ can be the opponents King as well.

grenv: I told you that it is silly game! As i've said i think between 2 logically strong players a draw is the clear result. I feel squeezed when i play this game so i hate it too.....!

grenv: Oh LOL! Then just try to explain him that there is no other way.....! I can't believe that a 1500 Legan rated player can't see this.....
I'm sure he will understand except if he wants to made it in purpose or he has other reasons.....
Perhaps he waits for you to gain an established BKR or a high one, as then he would lose less points with the draw....Just guesses....

Luke Skywalker: Or just offer to Kipling one. He would obviously accept....

رضا: I can think of.....LOL! Correct!
But can't i use it in the form i gave it....?
I mean: Is the: "It's the only reason i can think!" wrong......?

I think you miss the fact that the decrease of the vacation days happens at the start of the new day.

That means at the start of the new day i had 15 days and then after 23:59 i had 14. But in that time i guess our game hasn't time out yet. That means every game it times out now and on the whole day from now on, my vacation days will remain 14 since the decrease already happened.....

That is a possible explanation that i didn't find from anywhere just from my logic to explain that. So don't take for granted all these.....

grenv: How is that possible?

It isn't! You should have missed something....?!?!

To lazy, or is such a disussion beneath you?
Too lazy..... But if you insist i will have to write it....


What is the other reason Reza? BTW can i call you Reza? LOL! I can't call you with this "thing" i see so Reza is good for me
Just teasing you nothing serious....

grenv:Legan is a little silly, but I'm not sure why it's any more drawish than chess.

Many reasons but i'm too lazy for an in-depth analysis.....Just play it some times with a good opponent and you will see that you can only draw....


In fact the %age of draws on this site is about the same as the regular game.

You should not take this as an evidence of anything. Countless timeouts and too many weakies are the 2 reasons i can think.....

Well Legan seems a stupid drawish game while Horde of course is an easy white-wins game.....Grand though is a very interesting and good game.....!
Fencer you should extend the repertoire of available games here and modify the current stupid one's such as Maharajah,Horde(well actually this doesn't need a big modification if any, since black has a small chance to win or draw if white playes a bit carelessly).....

nabla: Yep, nice game right? LOL!
What books do you have in mind....? LOL!
The worse thing when you play Maharajah as white is that you feel like a wanderer in a desert! You are alone and can't do nothing, just wait to die! You just shuffle your piece without any reason and purpose.....

grenv: Yes sorry, but it has nothing to do with you. I just play only Backgammon/HyperGammon games right now(the last 5-8 days).....Before a week or so i was playing only Dark Chess and Backgammon. Now i'm in the mood for Backgammon only! But i started building my will for playing again Embasy Chess,Anti-Chess,Chess,Dark Chess so hopefully Monday i will start playing again all these games.....For the other types i'm currently playing(Pahtum,Chess,Chinese Chess,Extinction,Atomic,etc), i will be forced to play them since my vacation days will end.....
Sorry again i did you and all others waiting.....

nabla:I hate Knight Relay for no particular reason....! I don't like its rules....

WhisperzQ: White Maharajah, black Maharajah it doesn't matter. Both are boring. White you lose without being able to do nothing, with black you win easier than drinking a glass of water. Booooring....

And what about Grenv and Dark Chess? Why do you fear him so much? At Dark Chess there is one secret: Just observe the board with the edge of your eye! Why? It is known that in the dark, dim objects can be seen better when looking by using the peripheral part of the eye retina, so looking that way you may see a Bishop or a Knight walking at the board.....

WhisperzQ: No it's not a good idea What would happen if i had to play a Knight Relay Chess game or even worse a Maharajah game, or even worse a Maharajah with white game....?
But generally i find the idea good too.....

grenv: and how about this Atomic game?

Wow it should be a nice game! Too bad we can't see it.......

There is a Dark Chess game -the only that i'm aware- for Zillions of Games here.

The problem is that you can't have a fair game against the computer since at Zillions you can't hide the pieces from the computer and although for the human the game is correct the computer gets an unfair enormous advantage......
I will try one day to create a Dark Chess game! Indeed it is a very interesting game to play against a computer too......

Lost after dxe5??????????????????????????
LOL! Can you explain this? You seem to be more materialistic than Maschess (an old program that was obsessed with material).
There is another option for your opponent: To just played a risky move and don't be weak or cheating........ Of cource there is the known option of giving Fencer $20.000 and let you see the game in light!

Playing this gambit and sacrificing a Knight from so early would only Bring troubles for white......

Hmmm, so there is a stalemate......
grenv: Yep it should be a draw!

No.....! Since there is no check the King can go wherever he wants.....

As the piece it was promoted.......