Anencephal: No, it was never necessary. According to exact rules of Chess, such situation must be reported to the tournament director [me] who decides if a draw should be declared or not.

Fencer: So then why not keep it like this in Chinese Chess?

Fencer: And that is the correct handling of the situation. There is not an automated draw call after a 3-fold repetition (repetition of the same position for 3 consecutive or non-consecutive times)! The player should claim the draw to the opponent first, when 3-fold or 50 move rule criteria appear and if the opponent doesn't agree then it should be claimed to you! If he doesn't offer the draw and plays one move, he loses the right to do it..... So if a player wants a draw after a 3-fold repetition or by 50 move rule, he should claim that before he plays his move to the opponent....

Same occurs to Chinese Chess.

gringo: 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.

Fencer: but still easier than to program it.

I'm interested in programing aspect of it. Repetition is easy to detect efficiantly but i had not thought about perpetual check. seems tricky.

Anencephal: What do you mean about perpetual check? How do you define it?
Eveything that is well defined it is programmable....

Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.

As repetition detection has a desirable effect on move tree in an engine, I was thinking about cost vs benifit of perpetual check detection

Repetition will capture some of them, and king movement is limited in Xiangqi

<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

mangue: 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).

The rules are straightforward! Nothing complicated i see..... Also this rule for King checks is valid always:
Under any circumstance, the side that perpetually checks with one piece or several pieces, will be ruled a loss.


if you do perpetual chess, and your opponent too (that is you defend a check with a check),

This can't be done normally, since you have to resolve the check (that means to get out of check) before playing another check to the opponent....

Anencephal: Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.

This is not well defined....

At least 2 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.

At least 3 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.

3 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.
That is well defined situations.
Normally after 2-3 checks i a row, that repeat the same position periodically, should be a valid way to program it.....

Pythagoras: Sorry Pythagoras, but I think you are not totally right. E.g. because of the cannons it's an everyday's situation to answer a check with a check. The situation mangue mentioned is a draw, as both players violate the rules and it doesn't matter which player began:

http://www.clubxiangqi.com/rules/d4.htm


Another thing: At IYT they programmed, that its forbidden to check more than three times by moving the same piece, which is complete nonse, because you often need to give some hidden checks (with cannon and horse eg.), where you take several opponents pieces with every hidden check. So the important point is, if there is a notable progress in the position or not...

If I find the time this evening I will write down the repetition rules as far as I know them.

Well I think I don't need to write the rules down as they are all here: http://www.clubxiangqi.com/rules/asiarule.htm

(the link I already mentioned)

gringo: I know that's why i put "normally" in what i've said....

Pythagoras: ah, sorry, didn't read carefully enough. I thought you wouldn't give this case any importance.

Well it was my fault too since i used the normally in the wrong place.
Instead of: "this can't be done normally" i should have used: "this normally can't be done"....

Pythagoras: that number is another subject for tests
maybe if more than 3 checks, in chess start to drop the score toward draw slowly, in xiangqi exclude this condition if trapped by repetition

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.

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.

Hi,

if you are rated below 1900 resp. below 1300 then these two tournaments might be interesting for you:

below 1300 (open until 06/02/20)

below 1900 (open until 06/02/26)

Come on and join!

I have created a Xiangqi-Tournament, which can be joined by everybody interested:

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=14196&trnst=0&u=19298

No prices, but a lot of fame to win!

The Tournament: Chinese Chess Extravaganza (Chinese Chess) is finished.

Winner of the tournament: gringo

Several months ago I bought a set of Xiangqi disks roughly 2 inches in diameter. Yutropian who I bought them from did not have a board to accomodate such large disks and I never came across anything on the internet in my google searches to accomodate such large disks. Anybody know of a source to buy a board that would fit these pieces?

Xiang-Qi

starts automatically as soon as 8 players registered

(recreated)

Do you play Chinese Chess?
Do you have a Xiangqi-BKR below 1800?
Do you want to win a 1-Year-Rook-Membership?

Then this is the right tournament for you! Just join and try to be the best - the winner takes it all!

In order to keep the competition within the targeted rating range, three special rules will be enforced:

- No unrated players!
- Players whose BKR goes over 1799 until the start of the tournament will be removed!
- Players whose highest published BKR has been 1900 or above will be removed!

panzerschiff: I have a thin plastic board that came with my large pieces and have yet to find a suitable wooden version. I will look next time I'm in China, but the only wooden ones I ever saw were the ones in the parks where these large pieces were used.

Can anyone share their experience on this question? If I win a chariot for a horse or cannon early on in the game, should this normally be enough to win the game (if I play well) or does my opponent often have chances to draw (if he plays well)?

Beren the 32nd: If you get a chariot for a horse (canyon) and your opponent doesn´t get any compensation in exchange for it, then you get an enough advantage for winning the game.

Matarilevich: Thanks. That sounds pretty definite. But I guess having an extra soldier, elephant or advisor is not normally enough to get a win is it?

Beren the 32nd: King + one soldier against King is a win because the stalemate in XianQi is a win. Chariots, Horses, Canyons, Soldiers and the King too can attack to the opponent king. Elephants and Advisors just can defend.

Lordi: When I first began to play XiangQi I asked the question about enough material to win- and a much more experienced player told me that the basic rule is that to win I would need one more attacking piece than my opponent had defenders. I have found that it works a s a rule of thumb. My king of course is always an attacking piece.

Due to the change in membership status of the previous moderator of this board, it needs a new moderator.

Anyone interested, please send me (or any Brainking Staff member), a message indicating your interest. We will choose from the messages received. Some knowledge of the game is of course preferred! :-)

Hello,

Following the abandonment of the preceding president of
association "Xiangqi" of this site, I became the new president.
If you want to become member of this association, do not hesitate to make the request at the address :
http://brainking.com/fr/ShowFellowship?fid=429

Within the fellowship Xiangqi, we began a game of Xiangqi in educational matter which sees to be opposed a team of players to a player of good level.
The choice of each move of the team is done
after debate and it is that which is very enriching to progress in the knowledge of the tactics and the strategies of the game. We have besides also within the team of good players who by their comments bring to us much.
If you are interested to take part in this action, it is enough that you make the request to enter the fellowship "Xiangqi" to the address :
http://brainking.com/fr/ShowFellowship?fid=429

Come many, you will be welcome.

I see mention of a 50 move rule below (by Chicago Bulls). However, I don't see it mentioned in the BK rules. Is there such a rule in chinese chess, and if so under what conditions does it apply?

There is such a rule (although I don't find it written down ). If there are 50 moves played without taking a piece the game should (can, must???) be declared draw.

Five more players needed to start this Chinese Chess Elimination Tournament:

LOSE A GAME AND YOUR OUT

Please come and join!

You are cordially invited to join the new tournament of the fellowship "Oriental games" opened to all.
The supported games are:
Chess, Chinese Chess, Japanese Chess, Loop chess, Ambiguous Chess, Reversi 8x8, Go, Go 9x9 and Go 13x13.
You can be registered to the adress:
Oriental Games (15. Septembre 2006, 06:56:47)

Hello,

In your club, which are the dimensions of the xiangqi chessboard and the diameter of the pieces that you use?
I would want to buy myself a set of the game but beforehand, I would want to know the sizes that habitually are used.

to win a game without attacking pieces is possible?

if you won against a master who play without two knights, then you can call yourself a beginner(the first dan, the lowerst ranked player)

435152: no, this a draw, because none of your remaining pieces can deliver mate, and stalemate isn't possible either

435152: a beginner will never win against a master even if gets odds of two knights (well, maybe, if he is allowed to capture the center pawn):

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Example 4

with more examples in the May archives

kleineme:
how about the other side have a knight? it is possible.
how about the other side have a knight,a rook,and a cannon?

kleineme:
i should change my wording to make it clear:
if you won against a master who play without two knights, then you can call yourself a first dan, the lowerst ranked player. you begin to know the game, otherwise you are just a layman.

as to two knights handcap game it is played between two players one is stronger than the other.
the center pawn is capture if the piece did it by deliver a check, this is the rule, the center pawn is called "the iron pawn", if it had been moved, then it is no more an "iron pawn"
i don't know how you could play the two knights handicap online, unless you write a special program to do it.
there are one knight handicap, 3 moves, two moves and 1 move handicap etc.

And whom do you consider a master?

435152: sorry, but I don't understand what you mean? If you have only advisors and elephants, then you can't win, and if the other side has additional pieces then this only improves the winning chances of the other side. Or what did you mean?

He means a stalemate like knight on e9, advisors on d10 and f10, King on e10. Own King on e1. Something like that

gringo:
there are grandmaster and master. a master is the one that no one can give him two moves advantage and still beat him.

anyway, there are two kinds of player, one is to learn by playing the game, especially by playing the two knights handicap against the master first; the other one is to learn by the books first.
to day, most people are learning by the books or by using computer chinese chess program.

gringo: ok, I see, that's rather unlikely so I didn't think about such a possibility :-)

this kind of game is played between two players, one is much stronger than the other.
it is a game for a beginner to learn how to play defensively with material advantages, and at the same time to learn the offence skill.
i always believe that offence is the best defence, so when you play with a opponent at equal level, you should play attacking chinese chess.

i would like to point out that, to win a 2-knts handicap game against a master is not easy for a beginner, it may take a long time to do it, or you never could do it, if you can't improve yourself.
i would say there are many players at this site they are just a layman.