And you can play also with ChessV and Zillions. Not very strong,but you can play.
Nothing will remain as a comuter free zone in the future.

To play additionally Januschess with the Smirf would be nice,of course.
But which people from Germany have reacted negative? The Januschessfederation? And why?

Thanks Reinhard, I have sent the pgn-file as PM in your messagebox:-).I hope if Fencer reads this notes he will perhaps enhance the pgn-code.

Reinhard,I have tried Zillions,ChessV,Max,Vortex and Chess2000 (8x10) and all the programs only have a special format and cannot be used as pgn-viewer for the games here.I will send you a game example.

Reinhard, is your Smirf program compatible with the Pgn-Code of this site? Could we use it as Pgn-viewer?

Here is the link for download:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/chessv/ChessV_0_7_1.zip?download

is the double faced god and our piece got his name because of his two faces - knight an bishop.

It is very simple : If there is nothing mentioned,there is nothing forbidden.
And I think using helps correlates with the sense of correspondence chess. The using of engines is one of these helps (beside books,common analyzing in the chessclub and databases).The last decision has always the player himself,he must decide what is a good or a bad advice.Surely he can describe only the moves from a book or a chessengine.But I think most players analyze with these helps and to win against a strong correspondence chess player you need more..
Btw,has it sense to forbid someting,what you cannot control and to make the most players to cheaters? You cannot look in their living room.

Fariborz,such an important fact would be mentioned separately!.We have had this discussion often at our German serverchesspage (www.remoteschach.de),where some ICCF-functionaries are present often.
The German correspondence chess federation (member of ICCF)has also explained it on his webpage http://www.bdf-fernschachbund.de/

You can use the freeware MAX .(Misc/dowloads)
But unfortunately the PGN ist not compatible with the BK-PGN:

Max-PGN

1. h2-h4 e7-e5 2. i2-i3 d7-d6 3. Bh1-i2 Ni8-h6 4. Bi2xc8 Qd8xc8
5. Ag1-h3 f7-f5 6. Ce1-f3 Ag8-e6 7. e2-e4 f5-f4 8. Ah3xe6 Ce8xe6
9. Ni1-h3 *

BK-PGN

1. h4 e5 2. i3 d6 3. Bi2 Nh6 4. Bxc8 Qxc8 5. Ah3 f5 6. Cf3 Ae6 7. e4 f4 8. Axe6+ Cxe6 9. Nh3 *

A PGN-viewer for BK 8x10 games would be great!

Internetchess can be differentiated in "livechess" and "turnbased chess".

In "livechess" you play with your opponent one game only, both players must be online,there are no breaks,mostly short time limits (5 ,15,60 minutes,two hours for the whole game): both players play "synchron"!
It is the same as in OTB games:Helps and aids are forbidden. At livechessservers like "playchess.com" (the Fritzserver) players will disqualified automatically if they use software.Every day if you play there you can see such messages in the display.There can control it!

But in "turnbased chess" you play many games,both players must not be online at the same time,there are breaks of sometimes several days,the time limits are in days and not in minutes or in hours : the players play "asynchron".
That means we have here a kind of correspondence (server)chess (beside cards,fax,email) and in correspondence chess a l l kind of helps and aids are allowed.All strong correspondence chess players worldwide use programs to analyze their games.Look at the homepage of the ICCF http://www.iccf.com/
Do you find there any prohibitions? (because prohibitions make only sense if you have possibilities of a control)
The chances are now equal again,the question is only : how good can a player work with these helps?

<>Caissus Ed plays a very aggressive game that is much better than Vortex.<>

Undoubted! Even so I am sure he uses his own program to analyze his games and this is surely one of the reasons for it.
And to make it really clear: I don`t think this is cheating - in turn-based chess!

What I think is: If you play turn-based (with breaks of sometimes several days) you must live with the fact that the players use all helps they can have! The chances are equal again for all!
Btw,tedbarber,do you really think that Edtrice doesn`t use the "Vortex" at analyzing his own games?

And I ask me,why people like tedbarber play "turn-based" and not "live",without breaks.
At "livechess" like USCL or Playchess.com,for instance,the using of computers is forbidden and will be punished by immediate automatic disqualification.

I think,it is a very playable move.Look at my long game against slate, (Game id 286338).
1.f4 is comparable with the "open games" in regular chess (with 1.e4), a good alternative to 1.d4

Chessmaster,Walter is moderator and Thad was only submoderator.The moderator can add or remove submoderators of his own choice.

As usual only promises.

which question,redsales?

I got a message too...

Nonsense..weak level,Scarlett.

It`s time to ban at last Thomas Barnes and to change the board to "Pawns must be approved"!

Relevant is only one vote : Fencer`s!

I second Walter Montego as a moderator of the Gothic board.He is a good moderator and there are no "anti-Gothic Chess" remarks,only "anti-patent" remarks.
A patent of a game,which would not be allowed here in Europe.
Edtrice:"People contacted me after your "anti-patent" posts".
How many people? Two or three?

In Januschess the i/b pawns are not protected.
Is this game not "balanced" even so?
The chances are equal for both players.
Is not this fact deciding for balanced game?

I cannot agree with you Chessmaster

"When white plays: 1.Cc3 then black should immediatelly has to play one move to reject it! He can not play from the King's side as he would lose(or anyway he would have an important disadvantage). This restriction of freedom for the black's choices, is a huge drawback of this variation."

1.Cc3 probably is not the best move for White,like Edtrice` move sequence shows.If it proves something than the contrary of his statement.
This move is not a threat for Black`s weak point and he must not fear it.

"This means that on a game, whatever first move white will make, black should have the option of making many various moves and not be restricted to few."

1.Cc3 is not the only move,with 1. . c7-c6 Black has another good answer to defense his position.Moreover Black can try 1...Na6!?, 1..Ce6!?

Again I must say I see no decisive disadvantage in this variant,at best a small blemish.

..or more probably Barnie is Eddie...

I will move in my games with you so fast or so slow like you move in your game against Alex2,in which you have a lost position since move ten.(cit from one of your messages :"You are losing, not me, you just don't know it yet. You cant stop the pawns.
The game will take about 1 year to finish, maybe more now. I will move with 1 minute remaining.").
You are a really fair player!

Why don`t you play with yourself?
First please play your game against Alex2 to a finish without intentional delay.
Btw, most players know who are the idiots here.

<An imbalance was shown from plausible play >
The early Chancellor move is not plausible and demonstrates nothing except it is bad itself. It doesn`t show how you can take an advantage of the unprotected pawn.
< White to move can win in that game >
Show us a plausible move sequence which is suitable to force a win for White.And only than you perhaps can substantiate,that the setup is inplayable.
Otherwise we can play in GC 1. g4 b5 ?! 2.Lxa8 +- and now we can consider if the G setup is playable or perhaps we have imbalance...

<1. Cc3 Nc6 2. Cd5?! Ce6 3. Ah3 Cd4 4. Cc3

>So you can see you have an embarrasing form of imbalance in that setup. White should refrain from such Chancellor folly early on, true, and Black can most likely develop normally then repel it as we do 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5? but the fact that an instability of sorts has been introduced to the game should prove to be a deterent to its ultimate acceptability by the masses

I cannot see any imbalance in this setup only because the early attack with the chancellor against the "weak" point c7 is not a good plan (that means perhaps that the unprotected pawn is not so weak as it looks).Btw Black can also and perhaps better play 2..c7-c6 (like Caro Kann) with a safe defense.
I would say better : Black is okay ,no fast refutation is possible and the setup is playable.

Cardinalflight, be careful not to violate the Gothic patent with your random setups :-).

And for Tedbarber : What is a "balanced" game in your opinion?.What is "playable"?
Are these random setups not balanced and playable too? Both players have equal chances!
I think we have here at Brainking nearly all chessvariants as "balanced" games, except perhaps Maha- and Hordechess.
To your second point I will not answer.

No,Andreas I am sure you will see if you ask an lawyer.And if there would be a juristic basis,who should do something against it? The authorities in Prag in comission of a court of Phliadelphia? Perhaps because of a US-Patent for a game, which would not be allowed to patent in Europe? Ridiculous!

There are treaties between our countries,but not regarding of patents.He must have a patent here.
That`s why the big concerns let license their technical inventions in e v e r y important country worldwide.

Walter ,you cannot compare USA with the European community.Although we have in Europa a economical and political community, every country has its own laws, which can mostly enforced in the other European countries.
But between America and Europe it is another thing and I am sure if there is only an American patent,there is no legal capacity to enforce something here in Europe.

Andreas,but who will do something if a webpage like BK does not comply with the American laws?
The American authorities have no possibilities in Czech Republic and for the Czech authorities are the American laws not valid. (Would be great: American laws have validity all over the world :-) ).

Btw I think there is a difference between Czechia and USA und between Germany and France,because these countries are in the EG and many of their laws will enforced in both countries.

Walter,he can get a patent in Europe of course! But he has to register it in every single country,in which it shall have validity.
Otherwise he has no legal capacity.

I don`t think that Fencer needs a license to run "Gothic Chess" at BK,because it has his seat in Czech Republic.
GC is an American patent and that`s why it has no validity in the European states.

But better seems to be:
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses!!

This was it exactly , was Fergus Duniho has done at his page "Chessvariants.com".

On my private chessvariant page I have mentioned Gothic Chess too.
http://caissus.gmxhome.de/Schach.htm
Is it forbdden? What happens now?

He will not risk it,Ugh :).
Nobody will arrested in Germany because of an American patent.

Perhaps he comes to Germany? Or the sheriff?

Ánd if I don`t come?

Hm,what happens if I publish such a website in Germany?

I think you can ,but is not the same,Scarlett. If you read the site exactly you can see that there are different similar variants before GC was patented.Moreover the laws indeed are different in other countries.

the unpatented alternative to Gothic Chess at "Chessvariants.com".Here is the link

The solution is easy,Scarlett: You must move the chancellor from j4 to a4 and the archbishop from d1 to d8 :-).

Again I want mention that Fencer can replace the game by a similar variation,for instance the "Aberg variation" of the Capablanca Chess.It is the same game with a different setup and it is not protected.

For this case I consider to get a patent for this variation with the name "Celtic Chess" and donate Bk a license forever:)

:) most people want have the programs stronger...

Ah this is interesting,until registering as WTO patent it is unprotected in the Europeen states?