Hi Michael,

Wish I could have been there, sounds like everyone had a great time. Maybe next year I can give a Gothic Chess simul or something like that?

Let me know!

Is it true that playing Gothic chess can help improve your skill at regular chess?

ColonelCrockett: I think it can. And vice versa.

ColonelCrockett: no, certainly viceversa though - naturally ... but that fairly
neat setup-adjustment to capablanca chess has no magic at all and isn't pure ... ~*~

ColonelCrockett:

That same question was asked during the chess.fm internet radio broadcast.

I think one of the positive benefits that Gothic Chess will impart to a regular chessplayer is an increase in your own "breadth of consideration" as you examine tactical possibilities. For example, Vortex has taught me that, on occasion, sacrificing a minor piece for only two pawns can be very disruptive to a kingside position. As a result of seeing such exchanges work, and some that fail, I refined my own definition of the plausible "kingside attack".

Adding this to my own human "pattern recognition database" has allowed me to see similar 8x8 attacking patterns that I would normally have pre-screened and not even considered. How many times when we are defeated by some shot do we say "I was not even considering that?" Gothic Chess can cure some of this, in my opinion.

There will be some negative impact on your chess skills if you play too much Gothic Chess and stay away from the 8x8 board. On more than one occasion, ChessCarpenter and I would play blindfold chess games as we would be going on road trips to places that would take a few hours to reach. Invariably, at some point in the game, I am thinking pieces are on their "Gothic Squares" and Rob would pounce on my inaccuracies.

There have been no long term studies, but it seems that:

1. Playing Gothic Chess will widen your horizons and help your tactical abilities.

2. There is probably little benefit in the area of "8x8 chess strategy" since the games are so different.

3. Too much of one and not the other will lead to a decline in your play of the under-utilized game.

As an example... how many "chess players" with the white pieces would move their Queen which is under attack by the Black Knight in this position?

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=821982&i=30

From seeing so many blatant assaults against the kingside work, I just let the Queen hang, then parked a Knight in front of a pawn on the next move, all for "positional compensation".

A very advanced topic, a very complex position, but one I would never have embarked upon without previous lessons learned.

you do not know many chess players. ~*~

As before, I have said dialogue is important.

If the conversation does not lend itself to improvement of both sides, keep your piece to yourself, and keep it peaceful for the environment.

We are talking about excited youths playing a fun game (backfield starting positions notwithstanding) and improving board vision, whether in 8x8 or 8x10. That is all this line is discussing. Aspersions cast in either direction will not help this conversation. I know all involved are wellsprings of good information in the right circumstances; I ask that all involved pretend these are the right circumstances in which you each can give your best. I expect nothing else, so I am sure that the right spirit will come to this conversation.

The ability to weigh options you had not previously before considered is a great tool in this game. I saw many kids using the Gothic games as tactics warmups before their 8x8 games, and I had a few come back to me to say their decisions were different as to attacks after playing the Gothic. The idea that "boy, I had never considered that before" tactically means that it had an effect. That the kids felt the effect was positive means that it WAS positive. They were excited, they won their games, and the attacks they used were new means that the game became new to them. To me, that is a plus.

Grim Reaper:In my case;I learned the concept of the windmill;and have had 4 or 5 instances where I have been able to set it up and win using this tactic. I am also quite sure other games I have won have been influenced by my experiences playing Gothic Chess. However,I still prefer Gothic to all other forms of chess; especially traditional drawish 8x8 chess. I also do not consider Gothic Chess to be a hybrid of Capablanca Chess;which I still think is to flawed. And I would like to thank Mr. Trice for such a totally magnificent invention as Gothic Chess;which I consider the greatest of all board games.

my strength has improved tremendously just by starting to play gothic and beginning to move my mind in that direction. many people have told me recently that I must be a master, I've been studying harder than ever at my correspondence games and the results are good. (those who think I'm a master would faint to know that I'm only a class B OTB but I'm certainly creeping up on master level (or at least above expert) at correspondence.

that message had some substance after all ... as mentioned I don't envy anbody to
have fun with that neat capablanca setup for edification and freeing up the spirit
for the real thing which is drawish for uninspired computerplayers only ... ~*~ .

ColonelCrockett:
If you mean that your Chess strength imroved tremendously by playing Gothic Chess, then i much doubt about it..........

I clearly believe that someone by playing Gothic Chess, cannot by any way have a positive (nor a negative) profit at Chess in the strategical area.......

I also clearly believe that someone by playing Gothic Chess, can benefit from it only on a tiny (not even small) degree in the tactical area at Chess.....

Why? Because Gothic Chess is played on a different board with 2 different pieces............

The same exists for the Chess---->Gothic Chess direction...........

Chessmaster1000:

The skill sets are transportable. What chess player needs to "start over" to learn Gothic? None: the initial representation and the new piece movement descriptions are all that are needed to get going.

What Gothic player cannot play on the less ornate tactical field of 8x8 chess?

Again, everybody can, so there is some intersection of these two sets regarding skill.

As I have stated previously, I believe overplaying one and not the other is the only way to have a diminished capacity in the underplayed game.

Playing a healthy balance of each will have positive benefits in each.

Grim Reaper: although a bit indifferent,
very well put. and my heart is warmed anyway for
all children of the world who enjoy it. . ~*~

Grim Reaper: Again, everybody can, so there is some intersection of these two sets regarding skill.

I would replace "skill" in the above statement with "instant playability" or "ability to play instantly" if there is no such word(playability).

If the logic of your 3 statements was correct, then since any Chess player can learn in 7 seconds to play Extinction Chess, he would be good at it if he is good at Chess too, but this isn't happening, obviously. And this is general of course and doesn't occur only at Extinction Chess........

you should not expect that programmers know what a check is.
it is actually a three and a half check chess or something else
of a rather comedian approach contradicting even simplest logic ... . ~*~

Chessmaster1000: I agree in reference to extinction chess but I still think Gothic has helped me at 8x8 chess. In the interest of not insighting a riot I think that it can be agreed that a healthy helping of both games can not hurt anyone . . . agreed?

but we should stay serious. what's "tendencially drawish" anyway, french exchange ?
both games are well balanced as far as I could claim a gothic overview - actually it's the
'undrawish games' that have problems to be interesting if one side has huge advantage ~*~

danoschek: I assume you mean that when one side is playing poorly the game becomes boring (much more boring than, say, a 60+ move draw?). obviously you are not a positional player. Many times I have lost in a positional battle because I tried to make it interesting instead of the dead draw, needless to say I am fast becoming tactical.

but you do not have the required judging skills which would grant you to use phrases
like 'obviously' in any context regarding me - as your assuming is not even close to what
I have been saying - I suggest you read it again, perhaps strategically this time ... ~*~

danoschek: It is possible that I was wrong, perhaps you are a "positional" player. (but in what sense?). I have seen your games, and played you some time ago, you are not what people generally refer to as "positional". You use tactical means more often, which makes you a "tactical" player (who doesn't play positional when they have to? I was refering to those "given a choice" situations). I think you should seriously reassess starting an argument, that isn't what I was trying to do (and the moderators should take notice of this for future reference).

'you're a tactical player' (I'm not popier than the pope) but 'no positinal player' with
invalid phrases, although you oviously missed, 23)... Nf5 was highly positional.
- since you're crying for mods after asking for trouble I reckon you wish to be hidden, ok. ~*~

I consider Andreas Kaufman the best positional player on this site in the game of Gothic Chess. He gives me more trouble than anyone else.

will give you a hard time - you should play a few of them ... ~*~ .

Interesting debate ... please be objective and not objectionable. Reference to personal styles of play is fine so long as these principles are followed.

WQ :)

Grim Reaper: Agreed..........Andreas is amazing at positional play.....!
I have 2 games running with him and i've not seen any dymamic attacking move, but just a slow occupation of my space, killing me step by step.......Patience-patience-patience....I don't know if i'll have 2 loses finally, but he has the initiative at both games. Actually the positions for both games are quiet but we can say that he has the "positional" initiative.....
And initiative at Gothic Chess in my opinion, worth 70% the win......If one side has even a Knight less but has a nice initiative, he has the best chances to win. Gothic Chess is much more dynamic than Chess.

Chessmaster1000: I won't talk about a dynamic comparison (I still believe in the "old standby" chess) but I will say this about positional gothic, how does anyone think like that? I tend to look for almost purely tactical themes when I play gothic, it must take a very disciplined mind to look for the "quiet" moves in gothic (I personally can't resist the long range attacks made by those wonderful new pieces and the queen). I agree that in Gothic sacrificing material for attack is somehow more feasible, and the themes are somewhat similar. (classic bishop sac, rook for knight sac, etc.)

is not more dynamic than chess ...
the cherries seem too sour to me
said the fox who couldn't climb the tree ... ~*~

danoschek: After playing Gothic a lot, standard chess is felt almost as an endgame. Just like in chess after queen exchange.

andreas: interesting view, and sort of rings true, except that Gothic doesn't usually last long enough to go into an endgame (if you really want to win you usually keep most of your pieces until a sac comes to you . . .).

almost is a very essential word that often
makes the difference in a good post, thanks.
I cAn almost agree as the geometrics are almost similar. ~*~

I played a very interesting Queen sac in Gothic Chess at the World Open in the skittles room. It was a very crowded board, looking for all intents and purposes like an normal middlegame.

I sacked a Queen for a pawn, checked with a Bishop, the sacked a Knight for no material, to mate with an Archbishop next.

It was pretty cool

White to move and play Qxg6!!

White pawns: j2,i2,h2,f2,e2,b2,a2,c3,d4,g3
White rooks: a1, h2
White chancellor: e1
White king: i1
White queen: d3
White knight: h4
White bishop: i4
White archbishop: j5

Black pawns: b7,c7,e7,h7,i7,j7,g6,f6,a6,d5
Black rooks: a8, h8
Black chancellor: e8
Black queen: d7
Black archbishop: e6
Black knight: c6
Black bishop: h6
Black king: i8

The idea: Qxg6!! hxg6? Bxg6+ Kj8? Ni6+! jxi6 Axi6#

Those who are eligible for prizes in the various tournaments I am running, please contact me at GothicChessInfo@aol.com with your address information so they can be mailed out to you.

Gothic Chess "Fischer Clock" tournament.

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=9684&tri=48989&trnst=0

isn't there going to be a big prize tournament here in January of next year?

If there anyone here among the "good" gothic players (2000+) that would play me a game and help me analyze afterwards?

I'll play you online at www.GothicChessLive.com and type notes as we go along.

I just have resigned both games, because I am not willing to play a game which has been sceduled for 4 days/move under this circumstances.

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=903991
http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=903992

How could someone be at vacances and playing at the same time?

Sumerian:What circumstances?

I'm willing to give the prize for the tournament if i win against ChessCarpenter.........If you agree OK, if not then again OK. Of course Ed should agree too.....
And you are right. The time control is 4 days/move and i haven't played for a longer time at this game.....That's bizarre?!?!?!?

Sumerian: Very easily.

Chessmaster1000: I do not want to gain anything. I simply want to express that I am not motivated to wait that long for those simple initial moves without any understandable reason for that.

that ppl still fall to the illusion, an inflation of exclamation marks could substitute
meaning whatsoever ... but style asides, making moves during vacation is not
a pointer at multinic humbug per se - it could mean respecting you in particular ... ~*~

Sumerian: for those simple initial moves without any understandable reason for that.

I have around 650 games waiting for me to play so i play only them that have 1 day or less to expire......
For reasons i don't know and since the game is 4 days/move, the time limit was much longer, that's why i didn't play with a speed of 4d/m........
For ChessCarpenter of cource i can't answer......

Chessmaster1000: It is your choice to have that much games. And it is my choice not to continue playing under that time frame.

Sumerian: Of course.........My offer will be always valid though........

Chessmaster1000: No, thank you. Tournaments should be decided by playing (including resigning).

I am not sure I understand what happened. Reinhard resigned because George did not send his first move right away?

Is this correct?

Grim Reaper: Sumerian resigned because he felt ChessCarpenter and Chessmaster1000 were moving too slow in those games.