That sounds like an excellent idea;except that I really dislike computer analysis as opposed to human analysis.

I meant to say boycott this discussion board;not Brainking.

Unfortunately,Mr. Trice sent me a message asking me help him boycott this site. So,unless he has these articles available elsewhere;I do not know where to obtain this information.

Are there any Articles other than the one in the July 2000 Gothic Chess Review discussing this Openning that anyone knows of? The basic first 3 moves are: 1.e4 d6;2.Nc3 Nh6;3.Nh3 c6. As I stated in my last message I would appreciate the help of anyone knowing about this.

I know 2 variations using The Gothic King's Indian Attack as White. In The Philadelphia Variation White's moves are Nh3,i3,Bi2,f3,Af2, ect. In the New Jersey Variation White's moves are Nh3,i3,Bi2,e3,Be2. I have an Article in an old Gothic Chess Review discussing The Philadelphia Variation;and showing a game using it. Does anyone know of any Article discussing the New Jersey Variation;or of any games using it? Also,have any other Variations come along since Mr. Trice gave names to these? I would appreciate the help.

I forgot to mention that I had planned my last move as early as move 11;and only had to wait until I had driven off his archbishop to a square where it could not defend against the mates.

I would like to present this game;since I beleive it is one of the 4 best I ever played. When the game ended explosively after 14 moves I had 7 forced mates in less than 5 moves. Most were 1 or 2 move mates. My opponant was actually in a hopeless situation after move 11;due to his greedy over aggressive play from move 7 until he resigned. My opponant has a higher ranking than me at present.

I have taken my Gothic Board and peices to regular chess tournaments;and between rounds have had very little trouble getting other younger players to play;after I explained the differences. I also have taken it to our local chess clubs and gotten a few people to play. Also,about 4 or 5 of us meet regularly at each others houses and every 3 or 4 days just to play Gothic Chess. We are beginning to get others interested to.

Okay,maybe I'll give it a new try.

Since no one seems to prefer discussing games, but prefers silly flamewars;I intend to join Mr. Trice and boycott this board.

I thought janus was german for wolf;am I wrong?

Do you people discuss games or something else? if you discuss games I'll use this board;if not,I will not use it.

I meant to ad,I already found this game with Mr. Trice's help.

Thanks

In my earlier message about Mr. Trice's game in which he had a mating combination using sacrifices of both his Archbishop and Chancellor to obtain mate;his opponant was Mark Bittle,not Ed Bittle. It is a remarkable game and was a pleasure to watch unfold;I only wish that I still had a copy of its moves to play over and enjoy once more.

I am still having trouble with my game boards;any other suggestions.

I know you are a strong player from the games we played;so I believe you about your not needing outside help. But;what about weak players who play much better than their level of skill indicates they should;and they do so repeatedly.

Have can I get copies?

This game was in one of the early Gothic Chess Review Magazines;I think July 2000;it was also an animated game on the the old Yahoo gothicchess.com website.

Ed also played a game in the early days of gothic chess in which he sacrificed both his Archbishop and Chancellor and still managed to checkmate his opponant(not sure;but I believe the opponant was Ed Bittle;maybe Mr. Trice can furnish more acurate information on this.) I think this game was played in 2000.

My answer as to why I play turn based and not live is that I do not own a computer and must use The public libraries computer. The only allow us 30-60 minutes on it;Monday-Saturaday. Otherwise, I would be happy to play live games on the computer. I do play live games at my 2 chess clubs and with several friends I have;these are over the board games. Thank You!

In answer to what difficulties I have with Bird Chess,as opposed to Gothic Chess;I do not play any other Chess Variation except an occassional game of either Chinese Chess or Janus Chess. Why on earth would I want to play an extremely unbalanced game where White has such an unfair advantage in The Opening that he can take away all reasonable responses but one to Black;as well as making it very difficult for Black to have a decent chance to win. This is too too big an advantage for White. So,I'll stick to almost exclusively playing Gothic Chess. By the way,I also hate traditional Chess because Computers not only made it too easy to cheat;but greatly contributed to over analyzing it. I dispise Chess Computers and people who use them to cheat their opponants by getting their moves from them. In a chess game,or any other game for that matter,it is cheating to use an outside source other than ones own brain to get your moves while the game is in progress;and no honest person would do so. Unfortunately,many persons do cheat their opponants by using computers or other players help to defeat an opponant. I would never do this since it is not only dishonest;but flat out cheating. There is absolutely no satisfaction in winning a game I do not win by my skill alone;so Win,Lose,or Draw when someone faces me they are absolutely assured I will never stoop soooo low as to use an outside source to cheat them. My result depends entirely on my skill alone and nothing else. Honor means more than winning to me.

Is 1. f4 ; a bad idea in Gothic? I usually win when my opponant plays this.

Could we please get back to discussing Gothic Chess Games;after all that is the reason for this board.

Bird Chess is an extremely inferior to Gothic Chess;so why would anyone possibly think the 2 are the same. Bird invented Bird Chess;Mr. Trice invented Gothic Chess. Gothic Chess is by far the better and easier to play by both White And Black.

This is a great idea;but the price is a little rediculous. Since I play Gothic Chess almost exclusiveally;it would be a great help.

At present in a match;no matter what the score of a match in progress,each player's ratings are unaffected. This I believe is highly unfair to both players as it makes a match of any lenghth rated as if it is only 1 game. If you win or lose a match by a score of 6-0 you recieve the same rating as if the score was 6-5. This is highly uninformative as to ones actual playing strength;since in the case of the 6-0 match the players were nowhere near as evenly matched as in the case of the 6-5 match. Rating each game would fix this flaw and encourage more people to play matches. At present I lead some of my matches by scores of 2-0 and trail some by 0-1,and in some cases I am even. Yet in no case does my profile reflect my actual won-loss record. I have actually won 12 lost 5 more games of gothic chess than my profile shows. Yet because I won one of those matches 4-0 and won another 2-1 and lost another 0-4 and am ahead in 3 matches 2-0;my rating doesn't show it.

Anyone who advocates what Walter advocates in respect to anothers legal patent does not deserve to be a moderator of a board about that patent.

I most certainly did not just copy Mr. Trice in what I consider a balanced game. I have always considered my interupitation of a balanced game to be the same thing.

Lately when logging on I am unable to play my games because all the the squares have little boxed x in them and I do not know the position. What is the matter?

A balanced game is where the starting position is such that:(1.)all pawns have at least 1 piece protecting them;(2.) Indian formations are possible;(3.)neither side has a definite advantage on move 1(as is the case in Bird's and Capablanca Chess);(4.)Quick lines of developement are fluid and available(only Gothic Chess meets all these requirements.

Gothic Chess is a much more playable game than either Bird's Chess;or any other 10x8 square chess board game. Gothic Chess is balanced to the ultimate;they are not. Anyway,what opponant in any game would sit back while you wasted time re-arranging pieces;I know I wouldn't. I would "go for your throat" while you tried this silly manouver. Are you guys Criminals who would want to steal another man's legal patent? If not,why are you advising others to ignore Mr. Trice's legal patent. That is why this is a foolish argument;and I think Mr. Trice showed high intelligence in getting out of it.

How does a person go about obtaining permission to hold an OTB Tournament;and perhaps becoming a Director? Is this possible for,say VA where I live?

Omega Chess's extra peices are soooooo unchess like in their moves;that it is just not very interesting to me. However, the extra peices in Gothic Chess seem to complete the combination move capability of the chess peices that regular chess never got around to doing. I believe Gothic is not only the most interesting variation of chess ever invented;but it is the most playable and complete variation. Although,you had better adjust and realize that normal chess ideas will not always work in Gothic Chess;because of these new peices.

What is wrong with people on this site;I thought it was for discussing how to play Gothic Chess, the worlds greatest invention in the chess world; not attacking Mr.Trice to satisfy some jealousy over his having invented so wonderful a game. He has every right to defend his patent in court when someone has the gall to try to use it without permission or paying his very reasonable liscensing fee to use it.

That was what I meant;I presently lead some matches by 2-0 or else am assured of wins that will make the score 2-0 and yet if you look at my profile you would think my record of wins verses losses was quite a bit worse than it actually is because these wins are not yet counted or rated. In actuality I have 7 wins and 4 losses more than my profile shows because of matches. That is why I will avoid matches in the future;unless this discreptency is corrected. I have some games where my win is assured because the mate is easy to foresee and I have worked out all contengencies on my boarb at home;but my opponants seem to be making me mate them. Personally I can not see why they do this;when instead of playing out a hopeless game;we could start the next game in the match and they would would have a new oppoturnity to get a win. But that is their choice;I will win those games anyway.

I meant to say not calculated.

Why are wins,losses,and draws calculated for rating as they occur;instead of at the end of a match?

Ed does have a patent on Gothic Chess; but I think that if he ever wants to see it become as popular as it should be that he should be more flexible on letting more sites use it.

The player who caused him to be banned is rude and obnoxious with alot of players who do not wish to adher to his viewpoint. Besides Ed invented the greatest of all Chess Games,Gothic Chess. To replace Gothic with the highly inferior Capablanca Chess should be unthinkable. It is too too unplayable;that was why Ed "fixed it;"to make it balanced and playable. It is the most playable chess variant on a 10x8 board. Gothic Chess is perfectly balanced and a whole lot more fun to play than any form of chess ever invented;this includes boring 8x8 traditional chess;which has gotten too too drawish and much too booked and analyzed.

I sacrificed a Queen on move 18 to get a forced mating net in 13;I foresaw most of it and was only surprised once.

Like I said;I came on this site so I could play Gothic Chess. Then I found Janus Chess which I also like. I have no intention of getting involved in any flame wars;I just want to have fun and play my games. I do appreciate helpful suggestions on completed games;but will not accept any advice on any of my games in progress since I consider this cheating. I believe that I must Win,Lose, or Draw on my own merits and my own moves.

I tried letting him know that I was not interested in his feud with Gothic Inventor;and that my reason for being on this site was to have fun and play Gothic Chess. However,he continued harassing me. I have put him on my Enemies list. By the way,one of his suggestions of someone offering help in games against Gothic Inventor IS CHEATING;since it would be recieving help from another person to defeat an opponant in a game in progress. This is not allowed in any tournament or correspondense game I have ever heard of.

In these 2 games;each of which are 7 days per move, I made my last move in each of them on 18 December 2003. Rennchess is yet to reply; is there some reason I have not been awarded a time-out win. My main page shows he has run out of time to reply. I believe I should be awarded these games as a timeout; since it appears that he has abandoned them and timed-out. tedbarber

Is there a way to get rid of someone who is annoying me by trying to slander GothicInventor to me?

How can a copy be obtained. Thank you for the kind remarks.

I have played regular chess for about 21 years and am a Class B player.

Yes I have 2 Gothic Chess sets that were given to me for a Christmas present. I am 36 years old and live near Monroe,VA in Amherst Co. Some friends of mine and I play at each others house regularly. I also played a few games on the Internet VIA E-mail against 2 players from New Jersey and 1 from New York. I do not know their real names;only their Internet names if I can find them and did not lose them. I got a July 2000 Gothic Chess Review with my sets;this is how I learned to play Gothic Chess. Of course I have no way of knowing whether or not the games I have played are against good players. I have,however developed my own style. Perhaps I'll learn how good I am on this site.

How safe is Queenside Castling,as opposed to Kingside Castling in Gothic Chess? I have done this safely about 35% of the times I have done it. Of course,I have yet to try it on this Site. However, whenever I do it;somewhere between 30 and 40 times in over 250 Gothic Chess games I have played,I usually have to neutralize the 2 gothic pieces first and then play the King to the b file after castling or face a devastating attack. Is this normal or what? I would really appreciate an ittelligent reply.

excuse me!! I meant to say Gothicchess.org;not Gothicchess.com. in my previous message.