ChessCarpenter: I added the hyperlink to the board. I figured it would make it easier for any new players to find out more about the game by having a link to it right here for easy access.

For practical purposes, the 3-piece db version is what you download though. If you want the 4-piece db, I would have to send it on CD. The 4-piece db has roughly 1 billion positions solved, a little too much for a download. The 3-piece is about 1.5 million, and the 5-piece is 300 billion.

In Chess the following is valid:
A (N+1)-piece tablebase is approximately 60 time larger than the N-piece.
This exists for 3-4-5-6 pieces.
Does this exist for Gothic chess also.....?

(I have the feeling that i have asked this before. Sorry for my bad memory if it's really true)

I want to know if the 6 piece endgames will have any practical importance.......Because if the whole 6-piece is 1 terrabyte then it's obvious that..............

I don't play every chess variant. I play Gothic Chess mostly. I played Janus Chess as an experiment, and I found it "too diagonal" for my tastes.

As I have stated before, prodigious calculation has little to do with excellence in board games. Pattern recognition, having been there before and understanding the road map of what lies ahead -- this is what makes a player better.

Trying a new variant for the first time will not produce any results that relate to performance level that I have already demonstrated.

So no, I decline to participate, for the fourth time.

This has nothing to do with "courage." I hate lima beans. So, I don't eat lima beans. I don't think I would be courageous if I tried them. I would probably just puke, like I did the last time I tried them.

Nightstorm: Thanks for the link Nightstorm!

Chessmaster1000: It depends George.

King + N + N vs. King + N is only a few K since it compresses most of the draws. The longest mate is just 8 moves.

K + N + N vs. King + B is also very small.

But King + B + N vs. King + Archbishop is 3.2 GB since there is a mate in 202!

King + Q + P vs. King + Q is over 5 GB because the pawn reduces symmetry and the mate goes out to 268.

No i mean the whole size of :
(N+1)-piece = "KNNKN + .... + KBNKA"
against the whole size of:
N-piece = "KNNK + .... + KQAK"

Oh, the expansion rate? The (N + 1) piece is at least 7 times the size of the N piece in terms of nuber of database slices, but for the 6-piece Gothic Chess db, each slice will also be at least twice the size as well, since we need 16 bits per position. The other bloating factor is the number of positions, which will be at least 4o times the number of the 5 piece.

So the 6 piece will be about 7 x 2 x 40 = 560 times the size of the 5-piece.

Put another way, if I had 49 machines going at once, I would be able to solve the 6-piece db for Gothic Chess in about a year.

So with 1-2 machines one would need around 25 years.....
Very dissapointing......

EdTrice: sure okay - really good to know . so I will put the big bag of
bunches of lima bears you have dropped into my direction regarding capablanca-
chess where it indeed belongs ... it's okay we all have our timorous moments. ... ~*~

EdTrice: what makes such a difference to regular chess? ftp://ftp.cis.uab.edu/pub/hyatt/TB gives full 5 figure tables, and are well on the way to finish 6 figure tables, with pawns included. of the 5 figure tables, the biggest is KRP-KQ, with 250 megs total. the 6 figure tables run into several gigs. do the extra squares account for the difference?

http://www.k4it.de/index.php?topic=egtb&lang=de

rabbitoid:
16 extra squares and 2 new pieces, combined give this result........Very simple.

Just notice that the possible arrangements (without taking into consideration illegal positions and checks) for:
Gothic Chess is: (80!) / ((2^6)·10!·10!·40!) = 10^56
Chess is: (64!) / ((2^6)·8!·8!·32!) = 10^42

A HUGE difference..............!
(Notice that i'm a kind of drunk right now (although i don't hit to walls yet) and the calculations might be a little or more wrong......)

rabbitoid: what makes such a difference to regular chess?

The contribution from the extra squares is not too bad, but in Gothic Chess we have 7 piece types other than the king, whereas chess only has 5. So, in order to solve a "complete set", we have more permutations per database.

With 7 pieces x 2 sides to move, we have 14 database slices to solve to get the 3-piece database.

This grows to (7 x (7 - 1)) x 2 = 84 for the 4-piece database set. The "7 - 1" reflects that there are some databases that are their own "colors reversed" database, suck as King + Queen vs. King + Queen, King + Chancellor vs. King + Chancellor, etc. A black to move position can be looked up even if we solve the database with only having white to move.

Compunding this with the long mating distances, such as some of the ones shown at http://www.gothicchess.org/databases.html and now we need to use 2 bytes per position, instead of one byte per position.

So we have more positions per slice, more slices, and need more storage per position.

EdTrice: (and Chessmaster1000) : yes, there are extra figures, but for a single problem, say KQP-KQ, or some such not involving C or A, these don't come into calculation.

I'm not sure how your tables are set up. as for the ones for regular chess, the calculation ends with a capture or conversion, and the table points to a simpler table.

so the "only" difference is the board size, an increase of 100/64 in the number of squares. this is still considerable: for a single table of 5 distinct figures, in reg chess that comes to 64 * 63 * 62 * 61 * 60 ~ 10^9 initial positions, vs 100 * 99 * 98 * 97* 96 ~ 10^10 initial positions for gothic, again, not counting illegal positions, checks or symmetries. that is still a factor of 10. and, of course, the fact that a free central Q has 27 moves in reg chess vs 30 in gothic.

rabbitoid:

The total number of positions we resolve will always be less than the entire state space. For example, in a pawnless database, you only have to place one king on 20 of the 80 squares. This is because any position can be "rotated" to get the king onto one of those squares, either by a horizontal flip, vertical flip, or diagonal flip. You rotate the other pieces along with it, and where they end up is the position you look up in the database. Then you likewise translate that move to the unrotated move on the board.

Once you have one pawn on the board, you lose this 75% reduction symmetry. You can still cut the db in half, by constraining the pawn to the files a through e. If it is on files f through j, you can just flip the position horizontally, and look up that result.

Our tables are truly "distance to mate" and not "distance to conversion". That means the first thing we do in any new database is first generate ALL cpatures into smaller databases, and ADD those "distance to mate" to our positions prior to the capture.

This way, every move in the database is the quickest way to get to the final mate, and not just the quickest way to get to the next subdatabase.

I have seen such "distance to conversion" database play extremely strange moves at times, especially when each side has a pawn.

There could be a mate in N moves, but the pawn can promote in N - k, so the program would make the pawn promoting move (faster conversion than a mate in N), which could allow the game to drag on for many, many more moves.

I just downloaded and tested SMIRF 0.50 tonight. It has a pretty cool interface! I like the way the principle variation is displayed now, pouring into a scrolling text area.

Reinhard has done a real nice job with it.

It is being uploaded to GothicChess.org right now as a .zip file. It will expand to fill 24 MB when unzipped.

This is the PGN loading version of Vortex that also has the 3-piece databases, and much better graphics.

At about 4 PM Eastern Time you should be able to get it from:

http://www.GothicChess.org/vortex.zip

Let me know if you have any problems with the download.

It should be ready 2 hours after the time of this message.

EdTrice: Thank you for your compliments. But Smirf still is buggy at times. There still is a lot to do.

...is not such a strong program as "Vortex" or "Smirf".Anyhow it has some interesting features:It is freeware,it has a fullscreen display and his handling allows fast and blitzgames.You can try out to beat Max in Janus or Gothic in a fast 15 minutes game and it is not easy.
Menu - Live - Challenge - choosing the game and the time.
The following game was played by me with a 15 minutes time limit: http://caissus.gmxhome.de/Partieen/janusgames.htm?0_1665

Caissus: ahhhh - THAT is what I call graphics.
much better than the C64 outfit of the socalled vortex ... ~*~

Caissus: Those games are some entertaining ones. Thank you, Uwe.

danoschek: unfortunately is the graphics in MAX not so good. I have changed the pieceset a little bit to have a real janus:
http://caissus.gmxhome.de/netgame1.zip
Who is able to paint a better pieceset for MAX?

Caissus: oh I see ... afaik the piece set for the chess v2.0 by Stanback
is in the public domain ... it's on aminet from about 1990 and still much more
appealing than the vortex drafts - just the extra pieces would have to be added ... ~*~

Speaking of Vortex... I finally got around to PGN import. Also has the complete 3-piece tablebases, which are the same for Janus Chess.

Longest mate is 21 moves for King + Janus vs. King, and it is not easy to solve! There is a new menu in Vortex, SPECIAL, with RANDOM 3-PIECE CHECKMATE as an item. This has some of the longest mates setup randomly.

http://www.GothicChess.org/vortex.zip

Also better graphics than the old program.

Try this one:

White Janus j3
White King a1
Black Bishop e4
Black King c1

White to move mates in 72, very hard problem! This is part of the 4-piece database, if you order that version.

The one thing that Henry Bird and Jose Capablanca did when they made up their games was keep the King and Queen together. This isn't the case in Gothic Chess and I view it as a flaw. Ed says he put the pieces as he did so all the Pawns are guarded at the start of the game and certain Chess like formations can be played in the game. I think if the King and Chancellor's positions were switched, the game would be the best possible set up of all these variants. With the Kings on the e squares and the Chancellors on the f squares all the Pawns would be guarded at the start. The board would be even more Chesslike as the left five files and the three right files from White's view would appear as they do in regular Chess. About the only difference would be that castling would be long to the reverse side. This should make possible other similiar openings besides the Indian one. Center Counter, Sicilian Defense, and French Defense type starts. Plus the Chancellor and Archbishop's Knight part of their moves wouldn't step on each other coming off the back row as they do in Gothic Chess.

I think this is an improvement on all three variants. I wish there was a way to set up the pieces for the board as the players would like to have them, instead being forced to use whatever set up is imposed. Screen Chess isn't what I mean. Kind of like the Fischer Random Chess where everyone gets the same set up. It'd be nice to be able start a tournament on the 8 X 10 board with what ever configuration the tournament organizer deemed for his tournament. Ed gets his game played, why can't I get mine? I'll try a feature request on the board for it.

Walter Montego: I don't like the way moving one pawn opens an attack with a bishop without ever moving the bishop. Chess does not have this. The only starting position on an 8 x 10 board that eliminates this would be putting the bishops at E1 & F1. I'm sure everyone agrees that this is not good. My proposal is to play on a 10 x 10 board. This keeps everything Ed & others like about the Gothic setup and eliminates the flaw.

Thad: Why do you view the Bishop being able to attack as it does in Gothic Chess as a flaw? All the opponents Pawns are guarded at the start, so what does it matter? Moving that Pawn out of the way may not be a good move either even if it does free up the Bishop. Both players have this threat available to them, so it's equal. Yes, White can do it first, but he's not able to force the issue without getting some other pieces over there to help out. In the meantime Black can move a Pawn to block the Bishop, or put his Knight on the diagonal. If you move your Chancellor on the first turn you attack the other side of the board too. Which will still be true on a 10 X 10 board.

I haven't played Gothic Chess since December, and now that the tournament round finally got going again I'm remembering how the game goes. Janus Chess is the 8 X 10 variant I've been playing recently and though it has a lot in common with Gothic Chess, it's a whole different game. Janus Chess does have the King and Queen side by side and it got me thinking about Bird's Chess and variants. This is why I posted my comment about having the King and Queen together. I think it'd be a very good way to play and eliminates the two things I view as flaws to the other three versions. I hadn't even considered the Bishops being able to come out as you say as a problem. I think of that as a benefit for Bishops and another reason that I'd rather have a Bishop than a Knight on the 8 X 10 board when all things are equal.

A 10 X 10 board with the pieces set up on the back two rows, seems a little too open at the start for me and it might take a few more moves to make the game intersting. Especially them slow walking Pawns. Grand Chess uses a 10 X 10 board, but the majority of the pieces are on the second and third rows. Just the Rooks are in the back rows. That game sure looks like it'd be fun to play. I'd like to give it a try.

On a board with 100 squares, pawns rules get even more complicated.

Should they be allowed 3 steps on one move?
If so, are there now two tiers of en passant captures (one with a 3-move bypass, and one with a 2-move bypass)?

Gothic 100 would be interesting, but the "pawn pollution" problem takes some of the enjoyment out of the game.

I think this instructive miniature game is the perfect example of why the King and Chancellor in Gothic Chess are placed in the ideal starting positions. The attractive checkmate from the final position would have been impossible otherwise.

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=745920

Thad:There are no flaws in the setup of Gothic Chess. Also in BORING REGULAR 8x8 CHESS there is The Fools Mate for the totally unwary. There are no 2 move or 3 move mates in Gothic Chess.

tedbarber: There are no 2 move or 3 move mates in Gothic Chess.
Don't bet on this.......
1.Af3 Ah6 2.Ae4 Af4 3.Axh7# mate..........

Yes there are 3 move mates with the Archbishop, and many permutations.

1. Af3 h6 2. Ah5 f6 3. Ag6#

I like this mate the best, I actually saw this once:

1. Nh3 d5 2. Cf3 Bxh3 3. Axh3 Nh6 4. Ae6#

Chessmaster1000: Okay I concede to that; but I do still assert that the BEST CHESS GAME EVER INVENTED is GOTHIC CHESS.

No, the best game ever invented is Backgammon and our(Greek) Fevga(Backgammon variant)..........!
But of course this is too subjective and there are about 45-50 amazing games, including in these the Gothic Chess.

Congratulations to Matarilevich in winning the tournament. Won every game in taking it too. Yes, he's the player that knocked me out of the Dark Chess Third Quarter 2004 tournament. He is having a rougher time in round two of that tournament, but he blazed the Gothic Chess tournament.

Thanks Walter. I must still learn much about dark chess.

Perhaps you'd like chu shogi: http://www.colina.demon.co.uk/chu.html

ughaibu: Gothic Chess is my game.

Gothic Chess was mentioned on chess.fm last night, did anyone listen to the broadcast over the web?

Fine. I was interested in your assertion that it's the best chess game and thought you were probably unaware of all the alternatives.

EdTrice: How did the conversation go about GC on ChessFM? I didn't hear the broadcast, but if they are replaying it, I would be very interested.

This is what Dan Heisman sent to me in an email:


=====


Ed,



FYI, someone asked me on my www.chess.fm show if I thought that Fischer Random Chess was the wave of the chess future and I said if you were going to change the game, why not go to Gothic Chess instead?



Regards,
Dan H

EdTrice: I like it.

Gothic Chess live will offer another test demo. We only have 3 board up and running (6 people) so if you want to test out the new site, let me know by sending a personal message.

Gothic Chess Live Is Open

http://www.gothicchesslive.com

Make sure you check your emails for the password that is sent to you. Some people are reporting not seeing it, when their spam filters are set too aggressively.