For posting:
- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu)
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)
I was playing my friend (user checkm8) and i was, for want of a better phrase 'whoopin' his ass'. he was left with one pawn while i still has my queen, 2rooks, a knight and a pawn. i has his pawn stuck between my rook and my pawn so he could not move and the game was declared a draw. is this correct. because by my standing i thought it was fairly obvious that i has won.
thanx
PDJ
pdj... read server news on your front page, the rules have changed slightly so that white has to take EVERY black piece to win.
If black has one piece left but is unable to move because you are blocking him then its like stalemate and declared a draw.
It makes things a bit more even for both players!
i understand that. but what i was saying was that my pieces dominated the board. i had the oportunity to take his last pawn and was unable as his pawn could not move and it was declared a draw.
I can't see the Black pawns very well on the Brown Squares! It there anyway that I can change the board color or put a bit of white in the black pawns.
Making moves that reveal the board is as important as a good chess position. Pawns are very important because of their ability to see a lot of the board when properly placed. Knights are great in forward positions to reveal the enemy defenses. Good luck everyone.
to Fencer: please don't, it makes it a totally other game and i don't think it will help. I am unbeaten playing white, so it is possible (with a little help from black), but it stays a "black-game"
I agree with Uil. It shouldn't be change. It would be like changing the regular chess into non-classic. Players need to play it right and have pride in it, not take it the easy way out. I don't think history of this game should be change for the sake of it.
fair enough. thanx for all the input guys. im just a new user to brainking and not one of the best chess players on earth (but im trying). so thanx for all the help. ;-)
Is there anyway to distinguish the difference between actual pieces captured and those that were sacrificed to capture these pieces?
When we sacrifice a piece to capture our opponents pieces I don't feel they should be given credit for capturing the piece. I hope that makes sense.
This is not a "credit", the captured pieces are displayed only for information and in-game statistics. They simply indicate which pieces are missing for white or black player, that's all. No points or credits are used :-)
Correct me if i'm wrong, but what i got from the rules what that you could not leave your king in check (or put your king in check - like normal check, without any pieces exploding). Because i had a game where my king was in normal check, and it would let me move as to leave my king in check. I can find the game # if needed. Thanks.
I am interested in the last discussion and your explanation. The rules now clearly state taht the King can be left in check but not checkmate. Did the rules you show change regarding this situation or are the rules in error. Please explain ...
Removing the last move would probably not change the outcome, it would need to go back a far way as the game strategy was based on my understanding of the previous rules, likewise another game I lost, although I doubt it would have made a difference there.
The game ID in question is 27317. I would be happy if the game was just deleted from the database (or perhaps taken back to move 1) although I wonder if my opponent would as happy. Shame because I was a queen ahead before it all went awry (in my way of thinking).
In the rule of Atomic Chess clearly stated, the player who has his/her king in a check (which is not a checkmate) does NOT have to resolve this check. Of course, if he/she make another than a winning move, the opponent will capture the king in the next move. I think you didn't read that part in the rules. If you have had put me in checkmate then it would be a winning game on your part. You need to read the rules on all games well enough before you complain.
The concepts of check and checkmate aren't really consistant here. If they were, an attack on any piece sufficient to explode the king would be check.
In the case where one is in "checkmate" but can explode the opponents king, why not allow him to?
Why not treat this similarly to Dark Chess where any move is allowed?
Fencer: Ok, Now I know and I'm truly sorry for the message that I stated earlier. But, I won't repeat that game since it was hard enough for me to win without the Queen. And I could of had a Draw on my very first game of Horde Chess before you added the no more moves of black pawn(s) rules.
Fencer: You are doing a great job on this site and I want to thank you for doing a wonderful job. I hope everyone try not to take this gamesite for granted. This is by far the most and the best site I ever played. I do enjoy this gamesite alot. Thanks so much Fencer! :)
How about keeping two BKR ratings on this variation as, I think we all agree, black has, if played correctly, an unassailable advantage. I beleive the real interest would then be in trying to achieve and maintain the highest BKR playing White!