I detect Litmus paper in the form of a Bernice post :)

hahahahaha...
and thanks for explaining that to me :)

boy,I fully expect it will be a simple game.

had to go look..didnt you.

gunna enjoy playin you in the upcoming tourny.

*takes 2 steps backwards and holds hand over heart*
you mean You LIED?????

You guys know there is no Archmoderator function right? I just made that up.

kinda like the message box boo boo's g ?

But this is too be expected, since the ArchModerator can move like a Moderator or a Knight on any turn.

...the ArchModerate function is stil a little buggy, occasionally producing some strange side effects.

Very funny Matthew (when I met Matt in Philadelphia this summer with ChessCarpenter, I told them how much I despise Omega Chess.)

:)

:)

Yes I had to "hide" the person name "fraud". Whenever he posts, nobody will be able to see it except him, but the counter will increment.

well now that is strange :( it said there were 2 new messages, but when i get here there is only matthewhall message.....strange :(

If anyone is interested in the relative merits of an enormous number of chess variants, check out:

www.chessvariants.com

(sorry, not exactly sure how to include a link in the text). Literally thousands and thousands of variants, divided nicely up into categories such as large board variants (gothic, janus, grand, and Mr. Trice's favorite, omega, among them), small board, etc, including "officially recognized variants" (gothic is among them! Yeehaw!) and variants that do not use what we could consider the standard board and pieces (i.e. many of the Asian games). The site also includes links to any official webpages of federations official and unoffical, and an occasional game engine against which you can try the variant out. Good for hours of mind-numbing rules permutations.

Bernice 2003/11/18, 06:21:09
im here to test as well....just wish i could play the fancy versions of chess :(
this is an edit
Well i posted, edited and deleted....they all appear to work :)

test test

;)

*blush*

LMFAO @ LMCAO :)

Most people are unaware that chess was not always the "packaged game" that it is today. It has already undergone countless changes over the centuries! The earliest form of the game, called chaturanga (Hindu for the four branches of the Indian army) bore little resemblence to the 64 square board shown above on the left. Depending on whether or not you subscribe to the belief that the ashtapada was used to play chaturanga, the earliest form of chess may have involved rolling dice! (Note: The Indian ashtapada was a general purpose playing surface which was used for many different recreational board games that almost invariably used dice to determine the course of play.)

It was because that chaturanga was so interesting that a great many people were enjoying it. The Hindu players took to adopting variations of the game, including making a four-player version of the game, both with and without dice. The diceless four-player game, which involves only eight pieces per side, is still played in 21st century India.

As chaturanga made its way further east, local customs, local fauna, and even "bad translations" had influenced the game. For example, the four branches of the Indian army from chaturanga had names that translate roughly to elephants, horses, chariots, and foot soldiers. As the game made its way into Arabia, the Hindu word for elephant was translated to al-fil. The Spanish still call this piece the alfil, but the Italians sought a phonetically similar word, which was alfiere, meaning "standard-bearer." We know that the traditional design for this piece featured a split mark at the top to signify the tusk of an elephant, but the English players had mistaken it to resemble the miter of a Bishop. The French also misinterpretted the context of the split mark, and believed the "hat" to be one that a "court jester" would wear. The modern day French player would call the Bishop fou which literally means "fool", but means "jester" to the players of the game.

As the game evolved, and the "bad translations" and other factors molded the game, one thing remained common across all cultures.

A game of shatranji, ajedrez, xadrez, scac, ... chess, could get rather long.

It was in the Middle Ages, believed during the 13th century, that the rules of the game of chess started to resemble the present day 64-square board. There was still some tinkering going on, however. The Bishop was only permitted to move two squares diagonally, but it could leap over a piece blocking its path! This is far different than the Bishop of today! If you could believe it, the Queen was even weaker. Originally called the Counselor, our modern day Queen could only move one square diagonally at a time. This means the Queen was actually weaker than a pawn at one point in time!

It was shortly after 1500 that the Bishop was given full reign over the diagonals as it does today. The Queen was likewise given the full power of horizontal and vertical Rook motion as well as the newly strengthened diagonal capabilities of the Bishop. The Rook and the Knight, the two strongest pieces from the Medieval era, were the only pieces that were never augmented in power.

With the added power of the Bishop and Queen, combined with the fact that pawns could now opt to promote to the compelling Matriarch, games were not requiring as many moves as the antiquated version of chess. The European adoption of the new rules was so rapid, that it surely proves that players welcomed brevity and profundity over exaggerated exercises in recalcitrance. But this new power came at a price: now the King needed some defense!

An entire mini-odyssey regarding the modern day castling manuever began to unfold. At first, the King was permitted to move to any two (or in some cases, three) squares during the course of one turn, placing the Rook leisurely at his side wherever he landed. The rules gradually become more restrictive in this regard, but the Italian School was still holding out for "freeform castling." The "freeformers" eventually gave in to the modern version of the rule regarding only the horizontal displacement of the King during castling. It should be noted that this debate was contested for decades.

The French had one last hand in the shaping of the contemporary rules of 8x8 chess, that being the strange en passant pawn capture. Depending on whose story you read, the French viewed the bypassing of an infiltration achieved by a pawn as an "act of cowardice." Basically, if you moved your pawn twice on the first move to get passed a pawn that was pressuring the pawn you moved, the French reserved the right to remove the "cowardly" pawn as if it had directly impaled itself by moving forward only once. This special capture, known as en passant, (on the passing) can only be made on the turn following the "cowardly advance." This peculiar rule was finally universally accepted by the 1880's, but it had been used widely for over 200 years prior to this.

The C stands for Cute! :D

And what of the addition of new pieces or the moves they make. I think the queen originally could only move one square in all direction, just like a King except, of course, it was not as important as it could be lost without losing the game.

OK, I get the "LM" and "AO" part, and I am used to seeing an "F" where there is a "C"...so will Scarlet please enlighten me as to what the "C" stands for?

In the historical framework, the en passant move was really the French's "pet peeve". Even while Paul Morphy was still playing, en passant was not universally agreed upon, although most players did play this way. Howard Staunton was instrumental in getting the rules and standards written down, and I think it was 1881 that the official description on en passant made its way into "chess law."

The most interesting evolution I think was that concerning castling. The Italian players wanted the king to move ANY two squares, with the ability to place the rook next to wherever the king landed! Now that would be confusing! I think it took 80 years for the "freeformers" to be tamed to just horizontal movements of the king.

Yes.. and I assume a certain doc is waiting for you to return to the dungeon.. LMCAO!!

Welcome to the "where the hell has my post gone" club :)

your welcome....now back to the business at hand! ;)

One of my posts, timed around 1:45 (it now being 3:26) has gone but no problem.

GothicI: RE your last comment, not being a chess history buff I don't know, but I wonder if it was not more a process of assimilation than replacement. Take for instance the en passant move or the double move of the pawn from the 2nd rank.

Very well said! I was grappling for the concept in trying to stratify the Gothic and Suicide variants, but I just did not summarize it as well as you did.

Interesting to note that there are two forms of the #3 item. There are those variants that bloom and become a different stand alone game, and there are those that become so dominant that they took over and the previous iteration of the game withers and dies.

...and none disappeared, I think the problem is resolved. Thanks for all who participated.

ok Ed...I posted,then edited my post....both showed up...anything else?

Thank you.. :)

I will go review the rules of the game..

I will volunteer.

discussed chess variants, suggesting there are three types ...
1. Alternative rules which might emphasis one (or more) particular aspects of traditional chess which has the effect or limiting chess.
2. Alternative starting arrangements lke fortress and corner chess, which only provides alternative strategies and tactics without expnading the game.
3. Alternative boards and/or pieces, such as Gothic, Janus, Grand and Shogi which work to expand Chess.
Further, the argument over suicide vs Gothic was not a real one as they are different types. I think the first type will always be around as they can be used to hone strengths and weakenesses, the second will come and go as they really offer little except the burning of opening books, and the third will always be the largest group where many will come and go but few will remain. The ones which remain are more likely to be established as an independant game (such as Shogi ... here with some discussion over which is the actual variant Shogi or traditional chess) or contribute to the gradual change which does happen within chess over generations.

Or something to that effect :)

me how to play Gothic Chess?? I believe I am getting some free time in my busy schedy.. and would agree to a venture for a variation of Chess.. I am a fairly decent player.. Not a Master but, I put up a good challenge..

So.. who will do the honors.. ?

heres the first draft
edit number one.......

Whisperz, what was your previous post about?

I think I play like that anyway (at least some games as Gothic can attest :)

OK, you play soooooooooo lousy that you can force your opponent to accidentally checkmate you :)

There is a difference, isn't it? There is no check or checkmate in anti chess, you have to lose all your pieces [or immobilize them].

Yes, it's Anti Chess. And it's more than just playing lousy. ;-)

We already have it, I think, as anti-chess.

Suicide is also "losing chess". You win when you get checkmated, so you play as lousy as you can.

The system still needs some tuning.
Btw, what is Suicide Chess? I've never heard about that. Would it be worth adding to BrainKing?

Both Whisperz and I were editing some of ourposts then something funky happened, but not it looks like things are back to normal.

I think one post by ugh disappeared in the process too.

I did nothing, I've just logged in. I'll check the database.

I see some changes taking place.

I just saw 4 of my posts disappear, then come back after I wen to the Main Page then returned.

I thought I just did a copy/past from the website