timeout?

well, no one does forces you to play rated game

435152: even if I cannot tell who will win in your position with fromhell Chinese Chess (435152 vs. FromHell) , the schema with black pieces totally inactive and worthless also exists in occidental chess, does not it?

435152: no I have definitely not played a chinese gm before, and even if I learnt this game in asia, i have not meet any profi yet.

Matarilevich:
> you can play 1.e4,e5 2.Qh5
well, of course, because you have white, you can lose the advantage of being white, I guess if you are black, it is more difficult to play 1. Cf3 h6 2. Cc3 a6, because the development is also very important in chess.

About giving a pawn or two to gain tempos :
In some situation, you can give a pawn to gain initiative, like in kings gambit.

In chinese chess, a pawn has less value than in real chess, and there is no "pawn structure", as in chess. What's more, a pawn has very little value in the opening.

For most of us occidental chess players, we tend to play xiangqi in the same way we would play chess, which is probably a handicap sometimes. Asian players, which are far superiors, mostly do not care of losing pawns or elefants or even cannon, because they see the development as a major challenge and do not concentrate too much on material.

Maybe we are just like "bunnies" for many chinese players, because we did not learn the game as kids and no one did teach us the strategy correctly.

Maybe when we win against chinese, we have to win tactically, by calculating further, even we suffer domination on the board.

I am not convinced I would lose against a chinese GM with 2 knights handicap. Nor would I lose against Kasparov with 2 knights handicap. I do not know...

Xiang-Qi

starts automatically as soon as 8 players registered

(recreated)

interesting in asian rules mentioned is :

The side who violates a rule, asked by the referee to alter, and repeats the violation for three times will be ruled to lose.

Pythagoras: the rules are very difficult to implement. Even if it seems quite easy for check-check-check-check with the same piece, it will be much more difficult to understand for chasing. If you attack a protected piece of the same value, than it is no more chasing. If you chase than chess than chase it is -apparently- legal. So quite a nightmare to implement (and to understand). I guess a way to "request draw" is probably the best, because most of the situations can be quickly judged by Fencer.

<Fencer:
> Because it's more complicated in Xiangqi,
> instead of declaring a draw I would have to ask
> the player to stop doing the repetition moves
> because it's against the rules. And if he
> refuses to do it, I would have to solve it again.

If a player repeat checking or chasing or threatening mate, you can send him a warning, and if he does again, he will lose the game.

Gringo maybe can confirm, but perpetual check lose the game for the attacker, but as the link he references, the rules are so complex, than it is very hard to apply (would require an expert in XiangQi and lots of hours).

Ex: if you do perpetual chess, and your opponent too (that is you defend a check with a check), than it is draw ! well, the "asian rules" are very complex, and Fencer it is up to you to define a "simpler" variant

at least I would try to win if I were black. I think I could win, but not sure

thanks for reminder fwiffo !

actually there is a very special notation for xiangqi, which is very different!

very beautifoul ! thank you fencer for providing them