Between Capablanca chess and Gothic Chess.

But first, the concept of an 80 square board is not unique to Capablanca. Capa looked at it in 1924 or 1925, correcting the English Master Bird from 1874. Bird also was not the first, as he improved on Pietro Carrera's setup from 1617!

The patent and the setup for Gothic Chess is not claimed to have been the first try at an 80 square board. In fact, in the patent, we acknowledge the predecessors and had to prove our setup is very different.

There are 6 reasons why the Capablanca setup is bad.

1. The i-pawns were undefended. The starting position was therefore unstable, and kingside castling was usually suicidal since the castled king would reside in the file of the undefended pawn.


2. The bishops are "shifted" inward one file each, which changes the color on which they reside. They cannot reach the "long diagonal" like they can in regular chess, so many popular formations, such as the King's Indian or the Reti Opening had no counterparts in this variation.

3. On each side of the board, there are three diagonal pieces in a row, all aimed in the vicinity of the weak i-pawn. There is no symmetry, and there is too much attacking power focused on an unprotected sector of the board.


4. After Nh3 the knight covers the h-pawn, blocking the bishop in. The king's bishop could then only deploy in one direction, that being towards the opponent's Queenside after the f-pawn is pushed to free it. This cripples the range of the bishop over an important area of the board. This is bad.

5. Attempting to fix item #4 by playing the pawn to h3 instead of Nh3 does not solve the problem. White's King's Bishop would be free to head to the right after the h-pawn is pushed once, but where can the King's Knight land on its first move? Playing Nj3 then Nh2 after Bi3 costs a critical tempo, and Black's e-pawn can make one move to threaten the Bishop on i3, a potential loss of another tempo. Pushing the g-pawn then playing Ng2 looks more promising, but without pushing the e-pawn, Black has ...Ci6 to hit on the weakened i2 square. Of course ...Ci6 could be answered with Ch2, but this cuts off the Bishop's retreat path and invites either ...Ad6 or ...c6 and ...Bc7 to chase the Chancellor. This is bad.

6. Pushing the h-Pawn two squares in Capablanca Chess, seemingly freeing the King's Bishop, Knight, and Chancellor, allows a violent attack against h3 and i2 by the enemy Archbishop, Queen, and Bishop, by lining them up onthe c8-j1 diagonal. White can try to do the equivalent quick kingside castle in Capablanca Chess, but there is a positional detriment imposed. After 1. h4 d6 2. Nh3 e5 3. Bi3 (protecting the h-Pawn since the Black Bishop on d8 is now attacking it) 3...Nh6 4. Ch2 looks to allow 5. 0-0 without breaking a sweat. However, Black has Nj5, attacking the h-Pawn twice and the Bishop on i3, detracting from the merit of the position for White. After 4...Nj5 and 5...Nxi3, White's Pawn structure is ruined on the kingside since 6. jxi3 is needed to recapture the Knight that removed White's Bishop. White cannot play in this fashion without surrendering the iniative. This is very bad.

All of this, and more, is explained on the website at this link for those that are interested.

And everyone knows edge = danoschek, someone who was barred from this site.