Comments by judgmentality
Hm. Funny. I am going to sound very foolish here, but it did work when I just checked it again, via Firefox.
Wasn't working before, I swear! ::embarrassed::
The Dev appears to be a lot less vulnerable than two other well known multiple occupancy pieces, Peterson's Cobra and the wall. The rule for capturing the Dev is this: 'Devs can capture devs directly. However the other pieces of the opponent can capture the dev, if all of the four squares that dev is standing on are under threat ...' In the case of the wall and Peterson's Cobra, the entire entity is destroyed if any part of it is attacked without the whole being threatened. So the Dev suffers from weaker movement ability but this is partially compensated by greater invulnerability.
David Howe has written an essay about pieces of differing size - Growing and Shrinking: Playing with the Size of Chess Pieces. The notes to that page reference a few more such pieces.
Mark Hedden should be mentioned here as having made significant contributions to this genre of variants using multiple occupancy pieces (as well as multiple occupancy squares).
This the one you meant? Simple enough concept. Like some of Troyka's other famous games (Benedict Chess) we start with the regular FIDE pieces and board but turn everything upside down with a simple rule change.
At the moment I am writing this, there are a slew of games caught at the five vote mark, just below what would appear to be a qualifying threshold (of course that threshold could change if many more games get six votes). Among those with five votes, one of the games I would most like to see added is Gifford's Time Travel Chess. It is a very fascinating game that I have heretofore played hideously, losing fairly quickly. This is a game that deserves to be played a lot more. I have a feeling that it has some exciting hidden dynamics that have yet to be exploited by anyone. I hope it will garner some more votes.
Another I'd like to see played is Voidrider Chess, a game I've always wanted to play. (I once sent out an invitation to play it but nobody accepted.) It seems like another very ingenious Fergus Duniho game.
Connected Chess is quite fun, quite tactical -- Isolate to eliminate.
I was playing another one of Troyka's games the other day, Double Agent Chess, similar to Benedict Chess except the attacked piece always flips to the opposite color.
And I had the humiliating experience of checkmating myself (flipping my own king) on the first move. I lost without my opponent having to make a single move!
1. Nf3 was the losing move. May be a good practical joke to play on Kramnik. 'But, Vladimir, did you not know this is a Double Agent Chess tournament?'
Fergus, I want to commend you for creating these pieces. Brilliant job!
I particularly enjoy playing with the pieces you created especially for Mad Chess. I seem to be the only person who voted for Mad Chess on the poll for the next variants tournament.
Do you have plans to create more abstract pieces? I find it quite refreshing to play with pieces that reflect movement more than symbolism.
Above, you mention 'the Fairy Chess ZRF' - What do you mean by this? Can you create a link?
Are there pieces people would like to see made that currently have no graphics? I'd like to know whether anyone has done a graphic for the pieces in Tripunch Chess, for instance the Aanca described in this essay.
Described there is a piece which makes a one step Rook move, i.e., wazir move, and then continues outwards as a Bishop.
I have seen people refer to an aanca as belonging in Grande Acedrex, but aren't they confusing the Aanca with the Gryphon?
This piece is very closely related to Eric Greenwood's Duke piece, but not quite the same.
D - Duke: moves one square straight and any # diagonally; or any # diagonally and one straight. May not jump or move to an adjacent square.
Gary: If you don't mind, please do, and please copy Antoine when you do and ask him to add them to the Alfaerie - Many. Also, if you could send the other colored pieces that we don't already have in Alfaerie - Many, such as the green and blue and red colored elephants, colored crooked rooks, etc. Would be deeply appreciated. Should be lots of fun to play. Thanks. (I'd do it myself but creation of even the most rudimentary graphics is just beyond my reach at the moment. Apologies.)
James, looking forward to seeing your tripunch ideas. Thank you.
This essay is an admirable start! I think we can expand on the categories quite a bit and provide more examples. As the author himself says:
'I would encourage an effort to build on this, so that a more complete resource would be available to Chess Variant designers or problemists.'
I think there may be an obvious category which is 'Imitator' as in the Chameleon / Mimotaur. [Edited addition: I see now that David has written an entirely separate and also excellent essay on imitators.]
The 'Ooze' has a cousin in the Amoeba from Hedden's Microorganism Chess which I think introduces some more original categories of pieces as well...
Shogi Champ plays in chess tournament.
Remarkable is the 38th place of FM Yoshiharu Habu (6/9). Why? Because Habu is not really a chess player, but the world's leading Shogi champion, who has taken a casual interest in chess.
Read the rest ...here
Since the previous poll didn't list them separately, I question this approach, with the concern that votes for these games will be diffused resulting in their disqualification even though their cumulative might qualify them.
Ah, I see. To be frankly honest, I wasn't paying sufficient attention to your stipulation and for that I apologize. I feel the way I do when I make a blunder in a chess game. Hm. But I think my position, though it may appear weakened, still has value.
You do say 'Unless the number of players justifies it...' You were surprised by the number of people who voted in the initial poll; you could also be surprised by the number participating in this one. I don't think that's likely, so that doesn't remain as a substantive concern.
I do still have concerns that I don't see you addressing. Perhaps you can.
I still do have the concern that some people will not meticulously list all four as you seem to suggest they should and the votes will diffuse and that caprice could end up diffusing them. With the exception of Falcon Chess and Falcon Chess 100, which I think independently qualified and should both be added if they are both ranked high enough, I am still in favor of 'no one's' A or B. I know someone who strongly dislikes cannons and because of that, he is likely to rank one version of Grand Shatranj much lower; someone else could do the reverse and the result is diffusion. On the other hand, both people who like Grand Shatranj might end up being disappointed to know that neither were included despite the fact that each voted for a version of it. Isn't there an assumption you are making that people who like Great Shatranj will tend to like both versions approximately equally, that people who like Falcon Chess will like Falcon Chess 100 almost just as much? I am someone who prefers less familiar games so I will rank Falcon Chess 100 higher. That's an example of how votes between Falcon Chess and Falcon Chess 100 could get diffused with neither of them qualifying (though I think it fair games since both qualified).
In actual fact, to sum up, I expect diffusion so the chances that any versions of Mir Chess, Grand Shatranj, Great Shatranj and Falcon Chess will show up are lessened and they are playing on an unequal footing. In my last comment, I suggested that we ran the real danger of both versions of both showing up. In fact, the opposite concern seems to be more germane, no?
What I am saying in both comments though is that people are unlikely to rank all versions of each similarly, though if they look at this thread, it may motivate them to do so, but how many will pay attention to this detail?
Yes, Dr. Who Chess seems like fun. Great concept. The inventor has been kind enough to try out a game with me which we are playing just now.
Well, of course there is Time Travel Chess which is a great variant, lots of fun to play, the rules for which could be applied to most other variants. In the notes to Time Travel Chess, there is discussion of another time travel variant.
Time Travel Chess is also in the preference poll, but not currently doing very well (#27) -- unfortunately. Third Game Courier Tournament Preference Poll
Why did ______ create this ___ if it's not even considered _________ by _____? Well done, ____! ;-)
Edited in 8-22: In other words, I believe it's a mistake to refer to the dabbabah rider and dabbabante as equivalent.
'After 28. Rc6 Qh5 29. Qxa6, Topalov could win a fourth pawn for the Knight and in case of a check of the Black Queen to d1 come back with his Queen to f1.'
True?
Francois Tremblay writes:
I was wondering if you could help me? I seem to remember a variant where you accumulate points by having pieces on center squares, and won if you had the most points after a certain number of turns. I did a search for 'points', but I didn't find it. I also looked through the 'other variants' list and the 'winning in a different way' list, but didn't find it.
Would you [anyone] have any rememberance of it? Thanks!
They should give Kramnik back the forfeited point.
Good news that Kramnik is willing to play even having forfeited the point.
Excellent point, Andy. To win and leave an unambiguous impression as champion, Topalov will still have to win at least three games.
Just two more games left and in order to be accepted as legitimate world chess champion, Topalov will have to win both of them. Kramnik, on the other hand, can either draw both and win the rapids or win just one and draw one and he will be accepted as not only legitimate world chess champion, but also the champion preferred in the eyes of the professional chess community. Prior to the toilet scandal, Topalov would have been preferred.
Bravo. Well said. That's exactly what the 2007 tournament should be: A way to determine a challenger. Not a way to determine the world chess champion. Which is the way it is set up now. Right? Really, it doesn't make sense to call this a reunification match if the only 'reward' besides monetary is that it's just a candidates match to qualify for the 2007 world chess championship tournament. RIDICULOUS!!!! The loser of this tournament, if Topalov, should qualify to play in the 2007 round robin and the winner of that should then play Kramnik for the world chess champion title.
My chess clock arrived in the mail this week. I'm going to play in a local chess tournament this weekend, the Arlington Open. This will be the first time I've played in a chess tournament in well over a year. My rating is not very high so don't expect much of me. I'm also out of practice and haven't studied it much lately. I'll let you know how I do.
Larry Kaufman and his son tend to do very well there. One of them usually wins it. Click on the Larry Kaufman link to find out something about him that will interest chess variant players. As a matter of fact, I think I'll ask to interview him! Maybe I'll also ask if he wants to start a local chess variants club with me.
Susan Polgar Reports: 'Game over! Black hung a Rook! A shocking ending to the most bizzare match! Unification has been achieved! Congratulations to Kramnik! Well done!'
Why did Topalov have such relatively low grade seconds? Who would you rather have, Bareev and Svidler (Kramnik) or Cheparinov and Vallejo (Topalov)? Cheparinov, maybe, with a youthful penchant for tactics but surely not Vallejo. How would studying with Vallejo help me defeat Kramnik?
Excellent points, Gary. As I recall, Fischer had William Lombardy and Larry Evans. I can remember seeing photos of Fischer looking like he was really enjoying himself with them, playing on a compact set floating in a swimming pool! If companionship were a primary consideration, who would you take? Polymathic grandmaster Jonathan Rowson or Kings Indian expert retired grandmaster Tal Shaked might be my choices.
No, after a King is castled, the king only moves one space at a time, just like before.
In standard chess, it is indeed possible to capture the piece that is checking. Escape by fleeing is not the only option. Interposition of another piece is a third option in some cases, but not when attacked by a knight, the only jumping piece.
I recommend this excellent beginner's book for a review of some of the different ways one can check and extricate oneself from check.
An aside: There is a chess variant called Wuss featuring a piece that always must flee - can only flee - when attacked. You might try it out some time. It is very interesting.
Email me if you want to see my solution or want to share yours with me. I don't want to risk spoiling it here.
Happy 2007, and thanks to the many of you in the chess variants community who have been so generous and kind to me. You've made this a very special year for me, thank you. Looking forward to finishing old games and starting new ones in 2007, finishing old interviews, posting them and starting new ones.
A couple of us have been meeting in the Washington, DC area. Any other chess variant enthusiasts around here?
Also, it links to Chego which takes the notion of drops to the outer limits.
Excellent question.
Joe's correct. It's an unfortunate restriction. If I had the programming skills at my fingertips, I would add a variant where the options of movement were indicated by colors that shifted to reflect pathways of newly formed aggregates.
Meanwhile, Color Rider Chess doesn't suffer from this problem but because of presumed difficulties of envisioning aggregate pathways, I contracted the board so I fear it might be piece heavy. Unfortunately, Color Rider Chess imposes its own limit of forcing one to match colors. Again, I did that to un-complicate the visuals.
100 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.