Check out Alice Chess, our featured variant for June, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments by GaryK.Gifford

EarliestEarlier Reverse Order LaterLatest
The FIDE Laws Of Chess. The official rules of Chess from the World Chess Federation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Dec 17, 2006 02:31 PM UTC:
Josh asks, 'May A King Attack When it is in check?'

Answer: Certainly. Thus if your opponent's Queen moves next to your King
and checks it, your King can simply take the Queen (unless your opponent
has that checking square protected by another piece of theirs.  

Remember: Kings cannot move into check.  Nor can they castle while in
check, nor can they castle through a check. But they can certainly capture
other [unprotected] pieces while in check.

Juxtaposition Chess. Pawns and Pieces switch places with pseudo-pieces throughout the game. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Dec 22, 2006 02:43 PM UTC:
Joe -- No. Flags and Stones cannot swap with each other.

Six Fortresses Short Range & SHORANJI. A short-range-piece version of Six Fortresses. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Dec 22, 2006 02:51 PM UTC:
Joe, you seem to be the modern Guru of short range variants, so I am glad you like Six Fortresses Short Range. I have no problem with having alternative game boards to obtain 9x10, 9x11, or 9x12 versions. 9x12 would allow for the most maneuvering possibilities and might be best.

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Dec 23, 2006 02:03 AM UTC:
Joe, you say, 'I agree 9x12 gives you the traditional spacing, but then
you have to deal with a double first step for pawns.'
I ask, 'Why?  They can still be one-steppers.  I don't want two-stepper
pawns in this game.'

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Dec 23, 2006 01:58 PM UTC:
Joe, thanks for thinking about the game and commenting.  You recently wrote
[in regard to a bigger-board variant of this games's one-step pawns]:
'People whine when the pawns are slow.'  

My response is, 'Be that as it may. Many whine much louder when
checkmated.  But we still allow checkmates.  I like keeping the rules for
this game constant; not change them if the pieces moved to a larger board.
If it takes each pawn 1 additional move progress across the board - what is
the harm in that?

[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Gary Gifford wrote on Tue, Dec 26, 2006 02:56 PM UTC:
Chess is far from dead when it comes down to human beings playing against
other human beings.  In regard to computers... yes, the silicon brains, I
believe, do put a very dark cloud on many on-line games [both
correspondance and real-time].  But put 2 players face-to-face in a, tournament hall,
at a chess club, coffee shop, school chess work shop, or at a kitchen table and we 
have a great game which I imagine will
continue to be played, as it is now, for a long long time to come.

Doppleganger Chess. Pieces and their doppelgangers are connected for capture and promotion! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Jan 5, 2007 04:36 AM UTC:
Hello (zzo38) A. Black. Thanks for commenting. Yes, I just looked at your Communist Chess and then revisted my Doppelganger note from May of 2004. There I wrote: 'In the original game (the one that I awoke with) black pieces were doppelgangers relative to white pieces and visa versa. When you captured a piece both it and a matching one of yours was removed. Even promotions resulted in a promotion for your opponent.' It seems these rules would give us Communist Chess. My note continued: 'Material balance was maintained throughout the game, and it was very difficult to achieve victory. That game is a real workout and can be very frustrating. I changed the game so that each side had its own doppelgangers and by doing so created great opportunity for dynamic imbalance ... ' Anyway, I believe that you created the game independently. There are bound to be creative coincidences, especially considering the large number of variants that exist.

The ShortRange Project ZIP file. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Jan 6, 2007 06:28 PM UTC:
Hello Christine:

I had discussed contributing SHORANJI and SHORANJI Maximus with Joe -- those stand for 'Short Range Joyce Inspired' as his persistance led to their creation. Their predecessor is Six Fortresses Short Range - which Joe also talked me into creating... and no wonder, he plays it much better than I do. :(

Anyway, all 3 games are 'Short Range Projects' that you and Joe can use for inclusion in your project. Best of luck to you and Joe... and thanks to both of you in regard to your short range games dedication and endeavors. Sincerely, Gary


[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Jan 6, 2007 06:50 PM UTC:
The work of the editors is very much appreciated, but I know it can
sometimes seem that your hard work and time spent is taken for granted.  I
can assure you, it is not.

Thanks to all of you for the great 2006 year..., and indeed, for the
previous years and years to come... your hard work is greatly
appreciated.

In closing, here is a little Latin verse that I think can be applied to
our world of chess variants, and to our lives in general:

        crescat scientia vita excolatur 

   which means: 'let knowledge grow, let life be enriched'

Madness of Kings Chess. The Kings are, simply put, insane!! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Feb 1, 2007 01:50 AM UTC:
I like the idea of the crazy Kings very much - but, how is the game won?
Rule 3 states: 'The king may place himself in check, but NOT checkmate.'
If the King is placed in Check by its owner, can the other side capture the
King?

Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Feb 2, 2007 12:08 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
Thanks Abdul-Rahman Sibahi, and Joe - Abdul is correct, I mentioned the 'owner' putting his own King in check (Joe, this is not the same as your trick; different King involved). Thus, as Abdul-Rahman states, 'The player owning the king must not put his king in check . . .' - My main point then, can one win by capturing a King? Or is checkmate the only way?

Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Feb 22, 2007 10:17 PM UTC:
I got a notice that we need to reconfirm... I'm still playing.

Cannons of Chesstonia. Cannons launch a Pawn, Wazir, Ferz and Stone to increase strategical and tactical play. (12x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Feb 22, 2007 10:48 PM UTC:
'Can a pawn promote to a Ferz or a Wazir ?'

Good question.  Yes. But I imagine such promotions will be seldom seen.

Game Courier Tournament #3. Vote for which games should be in the third Game Courier tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Feb 22, 2007 10:59 PM UTC:
I read Jeremy's comment, i.e., 'The game listed as 'Cannons of
Estonians' charming as that is, is really, I believe, Gary Gifford's
Cannons of Chesstonia.'

Jeremy is correct.   Best regards, Gary

Pretentious Chess. All Pieces can move as and demote to a Knight. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, Feb 26, 2007 11:36 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
I found this game to be very thought provoking and enjoyed it very much. I think it plays well and can be very tricky and exciting. It is a great game that certainly has the players always thinking about Knight moves, in addition to standard chess moves. Well done, Adrian!

Shatranjian Shogi. Shatranj with extra pieces from days gone by and with Shogi drops. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Mar 11, 2007 03:29 AM UTC:
As indicated in David's comment... yes, the Shogi drops are a critical component of this game. David, thanks for the assessment.

Heavy Gravity Chess. Chess with heavy gravity, Knights can't jump, Queens, Bishops, and Rooks are limited to 4 spaces per move, Kings move 1 diagonal. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Tue, Mar 13, 2007 04:58 PM UTC:
Thanks for the comment, Joe.  The comment about the last games being on stretched boards and this one having 'shrunk' pieces was interesting.  In regard to the game itself, as pointed out in my rule notes:
On 8 March 2007 Jeremy Good informed me that Heavy Gravity Chess is similar to Ralph Betza's 'Half Chess' [invented March of 2001]. And that game is similar to Mr. Betza's 'Halfling Chess.' I was aware of neither until after I made HGC. Ralph Betza kept the Knight move unchanged for his 'Hafling Chess;' but in 'Half Chess' replaced it with a 'Crab of DemiChess.' 
Aside from different Knights; Pawns and Kings are also different. Ralph's King and Pawns, as he stated, 'have their fighting power doubled, as compared to FIDE Chess.' In Heavy Gravity Chess, to be consistent with the concept of heavy gravity affecting all pieces, the King and Pawns have become weaker than their FIDE counter parts.
Before closing: A special thanks to Jeremy Good for creating the new 'heavy' 4-move pieces used in this game.  It is much appreciated.  I like them very much. - Best regards, Gary

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Wed, Mar 14, 2007 04:46 PM UTC:
Yes, Charles - excellent point. Thank you. Jermey, can you update the pre-set to have a Wazir replace the Ferz? I think this will be a very good improvement - but, I am also adding a new rule that will allow the Wazir to transform to a Ferz (only once, and not back again). As to why Ferz was chosen over Wazir in the first place - This game, like most of mine seemed to pop into my head... and it seemed quite playable to me... the Ferz was there, and I liked how it could from e1 to a5 in 4 moves (as opposed to 8 moves for the Wazir)- still, in Heavy Gravity it makes more sense for the King longer to get there. I also like how a Ferz on c5 can stop a pawn moving from a6 to a1, but a Wazir on c5 cannot do this. But, your 'color' comment has great merit to it. And so, I have this idea: Start with the Wazir King, but, a player may, at any time during the game, while not in check, transform his King from a Wazir to a Ferz on his move... this would count as a move. This can only be done once and is not retro-active. It cannot be done while in check. I'll give you credit on the rules page for being the logical motivating force for the new set-up with the Wazir. Many thanks. Very logical. Better game mechanics.

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Wed, Mar 14, 2007 11:06 PM UTC:
Charles Gilman's most welcomed comments regarding the original Ferz-King not being a good choice, made their way to a three-way conversation between Joe Joyce, Jeremy Good, and myself. After the conversation we all agreed that an 'Old Monkey' would be a good replacement for the King. That piece is like a Silver Shogi General, but turned upside down. So an Old Monkey has now replaced the King, and I anticipate no additional changes to the game. Thank you, gentlemen. Gary

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Mar 15, 2007 01:21 AM UTC:
The main idea of the 'Old Monkey' here, representing the King (weaker from heavy gravity), was to allow the originally planned Ferz, and then to allow the backward move, not so much as a third avenue of retreat, but as a means to change square color-- which was lacking in the original concept [as Charles Gilman had pointed out]. I am not sure as to what is better, (a) using the Old Monkey, or (b) using a Wazir with allowance for it to transform into a Ferz (irreversably), when a player feels that is adviseable.

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Mar 15, 2007 01:36 AM UTC:
One terrible aspect of an Old Monkey, (and Ferz) of course... is that they have trouble capturing western pawns.

💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Mar 15, 2007 02:00 AM UTC:
That's the idea Joe! Players choose their King from a set of 4 candidate Kings.... just kidding, I think.

Xiangqi: Chinese Chess. Links and rules for Xiangqi (Chinese Chess). (9x10, Cells: 90) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Mar 18, 2007 01:38 PM UTC:
If you like Chinese Chess, be sure to look at Korean Chess, if you haven't already. Korean Chess can be played with a Chinese Chess set, even though the later makes no use of the river. It allows for different starting setups and has more dynamics which result from subtle changes to the rules. Both games are challenging, with Chinese Chess being the game most often played in the world.

Time Travel Chess. Pieces can travel into the Future. Kings can also return to the Past! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Gary Gifford wrote on Thu, Apr 5, 2007 01:39 AM UTC:
Jeremy - Thank you for your feedback regarding T.T.C. Your observations and rules of thumb are quite good and should prove to be of value to most players. And for those interested in seeing what I consider to be a very instructive game, I continue to highly recommend MSchmahl-cvgameroom-2004-77-566 from August 27, 2004.

[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, Apr 9, 2007 11:26 PM UTC:
I've been getting this message - looks like it has something to do with
the flying kittens game - can't get into check or make moves:

Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_STRING in
/home/chessva/public_html/play/pbmlogs/fabulous_flying_kittens/judgmentality-cvgameroom-2006-121-111.php
on line 214

25 comments displayed

EarliestEarlier Reverse Order LaterLatest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.