Btw, congrats Matatko and ZEROZERO for playing the game number one million.

Fencer: Congrats to BrainKing for getting to it's game number one million a month before BrainKing's 3rd Birthday!

game number one million...wow we sure know how to waste time,but its time well wasted.

I'm new and I would love to play BB variations (games, tournaments, etc.) against players of different languages. Are they all translated?

Fencer: that stat is a little misleading since many of those are simply renewing, is it possible to have a list of new memberships somewhere?

Vikings: If people renew before their membership runs out, they will not show up on the list. Only pawns which get a new membership (even if they had one at some time before) - I believe.

BIG BAD WOLF: I recognized many of those names from the past

Vikings: That's what I'm saying. They first turned to pawns BEFORE they renewed their membership - so they are sort-of new.

BIG BAD WOLF: I'm a renew and was a pawn for several months :)

ArtfulDodger: Yup, that is why you are on the list!

ArtfulDodger:
Oh.. you made the list.. de da da de di dod di di du di dum..
You made the list.. *snaps fingers and bobs head*

BIG BAD WOLF: I knew I was on at least one of Fencer's lists. ;)

poohbearboise: Everything is translated to all languages you can see in the small flag section. More languages to be added soon.

Someone has pinched the best mover chart

it,s back

Although i disagree 100% with the removal of Gothic Chess, and been burning from curiosity of WHY, i forget all these and just want to know what will happen with GC games that will NOT finish until 31/12/2005......? Will they finish automatically?

And what will happen with the ratings of Gothic Chess........? Will be deleted or........?

Chessmaster1000: After 31/12 2005, everything related to Gothic Chess [games, ratings, charts, rules] will be removed. Everybody has more than 4 months to finish running games and download them or print them or use them in any other way. It is a very long time and should be sufficient.

What a pity!
Sorrow all around me......:-(:-(
My favourite fellowiship "The Gothic Chess Ladder: Enter the Vortex" will have no reason to exist....
I came to this site due to Gothic Chess. I will not leave after it leaves but it's a huge hole.......I wonder how it will be repaired........?!?

Unfortunatelly your announcement has completely discouraged me from continuing any GC games....I'm even thinking of resigning them.
One last question: Is there any chance -even 0.00008%- to change your decision.....? Because if there is a slight possibility i will not resign......

Chessmaster1000: There is always a chance but I wouldn't rely on it. And believe me, I was thinking for a very long time before I came to this conclusion which is the best for BrainKing, not for any particular user. I know there are people who find this decision bad and wrong but in order to keep the site nice and friendly, I am sure I did the right thing.

Chessmaster1000:
It would be a shame to resign your games. If you've been enjoying them so far for the game itself then can that not continue?

I think Fencer's been very patient for a long time with a man who has proved very difficult to get on with. GC = Good Cull from that point of view.

And you can't leave ... who's going to help me improve my backgammon if "one of the best players of Backgammon on Earth" leaves?

What do you think .. Will Capablana Random be a worthy replacement?

Chessmaster1000: I came to this site due to Gothic Chess. I will not leave after it leaves but it's a huge hole.......I wonder how it will be repaired........?!?

Fencer announced Capablanca Random Chess as a replacement for Gothic Chess. It's also played on a 10x8 board, it uses the same pieces a Gothic Chess, but the setup is random, with similar restrictions as in Fisher Random Chess. There will be an 1 in 48,000 probability you start off in the same position as Gothic Chess.

AbigailII: No, there won't be. The gothic start position will be excluded because of the mentioned licence/patent problems.

AbigailII: CRC and grand chess are both great replacements.

playBunny: Will Capablana Random be a worthy replacement?

No! Absolutely not.........
CRC is a good game (actually GC is just a starting position of CRC) but any "Fischer/Capablanca Random" implementation of Chess or Gothic Chess is not in the same league with the original games, because of lack of opening theory, due to many starting positions and because of the random factor inside them. Why these 2 things should be a disadvantage.......? Well it is........:-)

Chessmaster1000: Ah, yes, I understand those reasons.

Perhaps the creator of Gothic Chess should be blamed for its removal, and NOT Fencer.

Fencer has been patient long enough with this man.

rod03801: Who's blaming Fencer?

Well.. blame isn't really the correct word... and I almost edited my post to reflect that.. lol.. but figured people would know how I meant it..

rod03801: Ahah. It was the emphatic NOT that made it seem such a big deal to you.

Yes, I can see your point..
pretend it's a small "not".. :-)

I think one problem with the random set up version of some games is just that, they're random! This might be fine for some people, but quite a few others like having the board set up the same each game and can then concentrate on how each game goes knowing that the pieces will be where they expect them to be. I doubt if I'd like a random version of Japanese Shogi Chess and I only just learned that game. I'm all for adding the Capablanca Random Chess, but I'd like a game similiar to Gothic, Bird's, or Capablanca's Chess that would have the same set up each time. I would again like to suggest Embassy Chess. The set up of the pieces is identical to Gothic Chess except that the Kings and Chancellors are switched in position. The Chancellor is called the Marshall and the Archbishop is called the Cardinal. The same names as in Grand Chess. The pieces are identical in all ways except the names. This board and set up are not patented and were proposed months ago when this patenting and licensing stuff first came to a head.

Black's side of the board.
8 RNBQKMCBNR
7 PPPPPPPPPP
6 ----------
5 ----------
4 ----------
3 ----------
2 PPPPPPPPPP
1 RNBQKMCBNR
--abcdefghij
White's side of the board.
M = Marshall - a piece that moves as a Rook or Knight
C = Cardinal - a piece that moves as a Bishop or Knight

This set up has the King and Queen together, all Pawns guarded, Bishops positioned for fianchetto placement, has the most Chesslike appearence of the four games in question, is not patented, does not require licensing, the Marshall and Cardinal may both move as Knights at the start of the game without blocking each other (compare to the Chancellor and Archbishop of Gothic Chess). These all seem like good reasons to have the game here. The opening theory should be very similiar to Gothic Chess. Embassy Chess will not have the drawbacks that Ed Trice has expounded upon in Bird's and Capablanca's set ups in his essay about how he decided to place the pieces for Gothic Chess and will have all the benefits of Gothic Chess, plus those I mention here.

Chessmaster: "CRC is a good game (actually GC is just a starting position of CRC) but any "Fischer/Capablanca Random" implementation of Chess or Gothic Chess is not in the same league with the original games, because of lack of opening theory,"

This proposition is irrational. The absence of opening theory does not detract from a game concept, instead it enhances it, especially in the area of tactical play.

Grandchess is an absolutely marvelous game that I have been playing for many years, and it is delightful that it has been added to the BK repertoire. It is much better than CRC and other games using the special combined pieces because of the expanded 10x10 board. Also, the special promotion rule gives it unique appeal.

Conversely, although I recognize that gothicchess has a large following, I never liked it and never accepted that the originality of the concept was genuine; holding patents does not necessarily prove anything, since many patents have been granted to those diligent enough to reapply for coverage of non-orininal ideas (at significantly higher fees, of course).

Gothic won't be that much missed, and I view it as an improvement (rather than a handicap) that it is slated for removal.

Pioneer54: Yes. You must have misplace a slash somewhere. Check around the 'b" or in the < >

I've been wanting to play Grand Chess since reading about it a few years back. I have some games waiting if you'd like play a few. Also, the Marshall and Cardinal in Grand Chess are placed as in Embassy Chess were it not for the two extra rows. I have yet to have a game get to where promotion might happen, but it will be interesting when the time comes. I have the feeling it'll be a lot more common of a thing than in regular Chess or the other 8 X 10 variants.

Fencer: I didn't realize that the site was unfriendly due to having Gothic Chess here??

Sorry.. that is my opinion..

Pioneer54:

Grand Chess is too unlike contemporary chess. The setup lacks symmetry, there is no castling, and the starting position is mildly chaotic.

The BrainKing community does not represent our target market, as we target consumers. We sold perhaps a couple dozen Gothic Chess sets on here, but over 63,000 worldwide since December 2000 (thanks mostly to large drop-ship orders to QVC and, oddly, correctional facilities in the United States.)

Each variant has their own lovers and haters, as was before Gothic, and will be after Gothic.

If you don't like it, don't play it, simple enough.

Just don't try to tell me it is not popular. I walked away from a $75/hour consulting job in the year 2000 because I was making more with Gothic Chess on the side.

Come to Bartell Hall in Kansas City next August. Watch over 4,000 high school kids play for the prize of having free college tuition for one year. The entrance fee is only $125.

Tell them how much you like Grand Chess, how much you dislike Gothic, and pay close attention to their reaction.

playBunny: the blame doesn't just fit on one foot.. it fits on all.. No one man should take full blame.. perhaps a bit of maturity and reasoning as well as respect towards another would best be needed.. but, then we all have cultural differences.. don't we.. WE aren't all raised with the same parents.. and while one country disapproves of a smile linking it to mean something more lustrious.. another merely means it in a friendly way..

My point is this.. Instead of reacting right off.. sit back and evaluate what all is said.. and try to see it from the other persons view.. realize also that heated arguments do get carried away.. more so with the male gender.. :)

have a nice evening..

Walter Montego:

About CRC: CRC has been "invented" primarily targeting to create a new drosophila for computer - computer games. I am not sure, whether it would be too difficult to be played by human beings. But it is free to everybody who likes it.

About the Embassy array: as far as I know the castling rules of Embassy are different to all other 10x8 Capablanca piece set variants. Because of that circumstance I supplied SMIRF with an MBC related position, which is mirrored from the right to the left. That way it would be represented by the CRC array 25932 and it would be playable obeying the usual 10x8 castling rules.

[FEN "rnbackqbnr/pppppppppp/10/10/10/10/ PPPPPPPPPP/RNBACKQBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

Regards, Reinhard.

Sumerian: Welcome back!

The castling is the same, the King moves three squares towards the Rook and the Rook is placed on the other side of the King. Maybe for your program it is a problem since your Capablanca Random Chess set up will pretend the Kings are on the "f" file so that in CRC the castlings will go as defined by that game. I suppose your mirror image game is the same as far as that goes. Perhaps you could just add Embassy Chess to your program as you did for Janus, Bird's, and Capablanca Chess?

Walter Montego:

In the current setup package of SMIRF beta there is a file "Variants.pgn" included containing that mirrored MBC. You can store a lot of other variant starting positions that way as long as they are using the Capablanca or traditional chess rules.

Like in Chess960 / Fischer Random Chess in CRC castling is defined by the END POSITIONS of involved King and Rook instead of the steps done by the King. Without that interpretation it would not be able to supply every CRC position with a castling ability. CRC uses only about 1/2 of those 48000 different setups to secure all paws to be covered, to remove some initial "traps".

Reinhard.

Grim Reaper: I checked, and you are listed as the inventor in the game rules, your due. Before you say that, ipse idem, the game summary is the same as the rules, think about this: one cannot, by definition, learn to play a game as complex as Gothic Chess by reading a 2 sentence blurb, therefore, ipso facto, the summary is independent from the rules. Ipso facto looks a tad more important than the semantics of ipse idem. Everyone on the site, upon reading the rules, knows you are the inventor of Gothic Chess. Why not be happy with that?

Filip changed what was already agreed upon. It was fine the way it was. It is not a matter of my feelings of happiness, which has nothing to do with it. He removed my name, removed the patent number, impugned the game by calling it a variant of Capablanca's (amazing how Capa is never considered a variant of Bird from 1874, nor Bird a variant of Carrera from 1617, isn't it?)

All I did was ask the question: Why?

His response was basically: Because.

This would never be an acceptable response to a request for an explanation of a change of status quo regarding anything of significance.

I took the discussion public only when 3 personal messages, one each day for 3 days, were totally ignored.

I took it private again once Fencer responded publically.

The result indicates premeditation on his part.

redsales: Because you cannot make a lunatic happy unless you do everything he wants, no matter how absurd it is. I am simply sick of it and any further discussion with people who fanatically argue about every single detail and continuously threaten with lawsuits not only you but many other people on this site as well is a total waste of time.
Anyway, it's a valuable experience for the future.

ScarletRose: Er, are you sure that was addressed to me? If so, what on Earth are you talking about?

Grim Reaper: I believe way back in February or March of this year, he changed all mention of you in the rules and description. A few weeks later he put your name back in the rules. No later than April as I recall. Now it's August and you're just now complaining about it? Isn't there something about speed being important in all these laws you keep quoting? I certainly do recall a lot of discussion about your leaving this site at the end of March of this year. Ain't it a bit pass that now? Whatever it is between you and him, has not improved in that time. Perhaps you should just cut your losses and be gratefull for how well things are going for you now.

I wish Ed accepted the fact that his name, patent-number,...etc would not be on the short-game-description, but only to the complete rules description. It seems of zero importance for me if it isn't on the short one.....

I wish Fencer would include Ed's name at the short-game-description. It seems of zero importance for me if it included it......

So if these are the ONLY reasons for this "fight" to start (i guess Fencer has other reasons behind it.....), then i see that it would be extremely easy with a tiny good will from both to have an agreement.....But unfortunatelly no one wants to retreat.....

Grim Reaper:

If you are making more than $75/hour on Gothic Chess. I can understand why its best for brainking to get rid of Gothic Chess. You must be raking in $$ over your patent, and your message reflects that your gunning for more.
This site up until now has probably help you make more money on Boards, etc... than you would have made without it.

Chessmaster1000:
you wrote:

So if these are the ONLY reasons for this "fight" to start (i guess Fencer has other reasons behind it.....),

it is mainly the behaviour of ONE which caused all the problems.

What Ed doesn't understand and we have talked via several PM's is when you refuse to use TACT in your communications and your only strong card is threats, you LOSE, "period" "end of story"

I suspect if Ed had treated the owner of this site with respect and used even a little TACT he would not find himself to the point of the owner and practically everyone else listening to his whinnying "no one likes me." sick of hearing it.

It isn't no one likes you Ed, it's your 2 year old temper tantrums and your disrespect for "ANYONE" that dares disagree with you or that doesn't bow and scrape to you.IMHO

ClayNashvilleTn: Not to mention a year or two ago when there was the talk of a deal in place to have Ed co-own or co-run the site that he came on boards threatening to toss out anyone he felt like. That really went over well.

.. Yeah he was supposed to be the "Arch Moderator"