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)
Forumlijst
U hebt geen toestemming om berichten op dit forum achter te laten. Het minimaal vereiste lidmaatschap om berichten op dit forum achter te mogen laten is Brain Pion.
nabla: If it is okay with you I will add the links to description above then they will always be available for those who are interested without going back through the discussion history ... okay?
Just to make some facts straight : the game of Anti Chess, more often called Losing Chess or Suicide Chess, is more than 100 years old, and the rules used here are the standard ones. For some more details, here is an historical research by John Beasley : http://www.pion.ch/Losing/LCLIT3AR.html.
The game has been studied a lot, by hand and by computer. Here is an opening book which should avoid you a lot of early trouble : http://catalin.francu.com/nilatac/book.php.
My personal homepage has tons of information too, but available only in French language.
danoschek: I think it is extremely insightful (and incisive) and beautiful too ... just thought it might have been a technical term which I hadn't come across before ... maybe others will have similar games (positions) to share :)
Onderwerp: All Chess960 startpositions at one page
Hi all Chess960 friends,
the Chess Tigers have published a very compact summary consisting of two tables,
from which any of the 960 existing starting positions easyly could be derived.
It seems as if this page actually is available in German language only.
Aangepast door Nasmichael (19. maart 2005, 00:07:53)
redsales: " (To WhispersQ): The problem with this game is that it's really a training game to get the players to figure out the moves. It was not intended for FM-IM-GM class players!" Correct. It makes for good discussion between the veteran player (Maharajah) and the novice. It is still an entertaining idea, and more "uneven chess" like this makes for good teaching tools, solved or not.
settings changed ... ... - and I too think three
boards could go as one fisher/corner/fortress that is ...
last not least, avoiding chessfree bubbles,here a cornergame with a pure mate ... ~*~
From what I've seen Fencer has no intention of creating a board for Fisher chess. It's more likely that (from what I saw on BK board) he is going to shrink the smaller boards due to the low usage of them. If people want a Fisher Chess board that badly then it can be asked for either on the BK board or on Feature requests.
Onderwerp: Re: oh right we have no fisherboard yet ... :)
BTW as there is no Fischer Random Chess board (yet) discussion of this variant is also welcome here. [Fencer, if you read this, then maybe you could change the description to include it. Could also combine with Fortress Chess too, if you like, as they are all very similar.]
Onderwerp: Re: oh right we have no fisherboard yet ... :)
danoschek: Sorry I can't reply to your pm directly regarding this board as you have me on hide. I was going to sort of agree with you but now I can't and your stunt is not appreciated.
Another option is to increase the (lone) Maharajah's power by adding the camel move (3/1 jump). This is then tricky for black at the start as white can trap the King behind the pawns with the camel's extra reach while staying outside the pawns' attack.
Maybe Fencer can set this up as another variant ... call it Maharani (wife of a Maharajah).
BuilderQ: Your idea would unfortunately make it a sure-win for white. Once black's army moves a few lines, the Maharajah sacrifices itself and then attacks the black from behind giving him no chance ...
Chessmaster1000: i mean closer in that it would result for more wins for white. You are right in that it doesn't change the fact that this is a "solved" game. I like the idea of removing the black queen.
Then White would replace the Maharajah on any square. Of course, black would be free to move into check with either of his first two lives, enabling him to capture at least two pieces during the game, making it a bit more even.
Just remove black's Queen and perhaps we have a game.......Or give white 3 Maharajah's (2 Maharajah's loses too).........
But please remove the current ridiculous game. It's a shame that such game exist here, while other much better aren't........
WhisperzQ: i totally agree, but at least it would be closer than now! The problem with this game is that it's really a training game to get the players to figure out the moves. It was not intended for FM-IM-GM class players!
Then games would last 200 moves to mate the King and that's not the main bad thing. The most ugly will be that 99% of games will be drawn!
Even if you give at the King just the Knight moves, the mate will be damn difficult even with a Queen...........
very safe, feel free to experiment with a4, h5 things that are off the wall in regular chess. But at the same time, tried and true openings work as well.
I am still rather beginner for this game and I wonder if we can apply without risk the book of the openings of the "standard" chess
to this variant "Extinction chess".
What do you think about it?
Tompark, your definition is a particular case of move and it´s only one consequence in standard chess, but in a cylindrical board or in other surface is not correct geometrically.
Matarilevich: I have and it doesn't let you make the move. To my oppinion, it does the right thing. I think the correct definition for a move is this:
a change in the position of one, or in a special case of castling, two, pieces on the board.
yes, passing is a kind of move but I think that's because WE call it a move. And that's because we do it in our own turn when we cannot make a legal MOVE!
I just noticed that in the final standings of the 2004 Third Quarter open that I finished behind in S-B points, but still ahead in the final placing. I guess I won and lost to the right people? :)
That's the second time that I've done better than the S-B placing would have me. I'm glad it's only used break ties. Even then, I can't say I like it much, but it does seem better than not using it at all. I wonder why the tournament didn't go to another round? Some of my tournaments continue on with the section winners and others just end with it tied. The tie here seems like a good result with so many players, but another round with them two only wouldn't be a bad thing either.
Onderwerp: 2004 Third Quarter Open Number 3 Extinction Chess
The tournament is over. Two first place finishes for the championship. Congratulations Matarilevich and Caissus. Yo both took care of me. redsales was tough too. It looks like copying the final standings isn't going to work very well, so I'll supply the link too.
http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?tri=14921
Aangepast door danoschek (15. februari 2005, 21:08:54)
mahavrilla: I believe that tempered capablanca chess appears
to have a higher potential than janus ... but the majority of games here
doesn't reflect all the strategic options properly, coffeehouse style mainly. ~*~
My opinion is that opening theory is only destroying chess at the highest level. Admittedly, there are those instances where it somehow tarnishes the games of us non-godlike-beings, however I think they are few and in most instances theory actually helps a person to understand the strategies of an opening- theory in this sense being what it should: an explanation of the goals and strategies inherent in the openings with analysis, not just the analysis. However, even if it were the case that theory kills originality, Fischer Random provides for well over one hundred starting positions, each one with myriads of possible goals and strategies that you would never see in "just chess", making it necessary to develop your own theory in each game! In fact my favorite thing about one of my new favorite games is it enhances your positional evaluation skills, cause you need em!
I am a supporter of the idea that if we do not evolve chess, it's only going to get worse. Opening theory is killing chess. After playing gothic and janus chess here, I am starting to conclude that standard chess is going to have to do more than shuffle the back rank in order to give it life. Anybody else have some thoughts here?
(verberg) Als u een ouder bericht van een bepaalde speler wilt vinden, klik dan op zijn/haar Profiel en gebruik de knop "toon berichten van deze speler" bovenaan de pagina. (konec) (laat alle tips zien)