Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 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 ]

Single Comment

Modern Shatranj. A bridge between modern chess and the historic game of Shatranj. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
George Duke wrote on Mon, Aug 24, 2009 10:11 PM UTC:
(Now note please that I give Lemurian Shat. ''preeminente'' for the way-fun two Bent pieces and appreciate Joyce's recent overtures to Falcon starting array. He is very welcome for the one now named after himself there BRNKF...) I am looking at this again for 5 or 10 minutes, since I have a consistent point of view, and determine that I won't change my rating of 17.January.2008 two years ago. This is too much like Shatranj. If everybody did this we would have 1000 Shatranjs written up. A comment or Mutator in a thread would suffice, despite of course huge ramifications. Sometimes it's a fine line. This Modern Shatranj adds Ferz to Alfil and Wazir to General/Queen. Well, it says that, sort of, so no need to call attention to the past rating specifically, but Joe knows what the score is. In the opening paragraph Joyce writes, ''This page is an adaptation of the original Shatranj page on the Chess Variant Page. All else is the historic game,'' writing succinctly like he used to talk. Okay so what else is new? This M.S. could be explained in two sentences. If neat Bent Hero and Bent Shaman by Joyce's approach fully-realized would take two millennia, another two would be needed for many Shatranjs. Joyce has a point, if there are so many credits for so relatively minor change, there is no invention. Also, there is slight error that off and on there really was two-step, so that is error of CVPage original Shatranj (that I just relearned myself): mediaeval two-step was very occasional. Also annoying is before the list of 6 near the end he refers to M.S. as ''Chess,'' and other spots toward end of the write-up are confusing, for example, M.S. itself only uses 1 and 2 of the 6. Good grief, it's like looking into someone's unpolished notebook.