i totally agree. i know we both learned a lot from this game...me mostly by accident! And that wouldn't have happened with a draw. There's something really abstruse about goth that eludes me...you're right, it must be the way the new power pieces can gang up on a king. Makes it more ideal for the attacking player because of all the potential (knight!) sacs in the middle game.

Whisperz: at the time i was just hoping for a 2 pawn for knight endgame and a draw....the h7 pawn was the key because it was the only thing preventing perpetual check. Honestly though, I think Walter should have won the game in the middle game before the sac.

yes bwildman, finished recently!

glad to see you back, GI. I don't always agree with what you say, but I respect your accomplishments in chess and as a player. And furthering that, let me post something about gothic chess itself, which is what the board is intended:

I won the following game from Walter Montego with a rook sacrifice. The problem is, i'm not sure if it was sound. After the game, I ran it through the Vortex at GM level and it didn't even consider the sac on the "shown thinking" window. I forget the actual move it suggested, but that's irrelevant, because I only used the vortex for post mortem analysis. Instead, it said the position was drawish, which is actually what I had thought at the time too, but Walter rejected my offer! So my question to everyone is: is the rook sac sound or is there a better plan? I'm interested in any thoughts you have.

http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=389169&i=50

Tough to lose a competitor like Ed Trice, but I do think a change was due after the draconian way simple disagreements were mishandled. I think you're the right guy for the job.