[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Sky. Brilliant original game by Christine Bagley-Jones. Pieces promote through a succession of odd leapers eventually to a rooks.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]sorry didnt see your comment till now :)
well u know, i dont really like some of these names either, though i dont mind the 'tripper', however, i didn't make these names up, i got them from George Jelliss's site 'all the king's men'.
http://www.mayhematics.com/v/gm.htm#L
About the 'lancer', i dont mind that name, but, i know i didn't make it up but i can't seem to see a 4-2 leaper mentioned on that webpage lol.
While i'm here, i have been thinking about what some people have said about the tripper able to check on move 2 and maybe this is no good, and, maybe u guys are right, haha, i'm thinking of updating this game and simply just taking the offending trippers away, i tried this out and it seems to play just as good as the game does in it's present format.
Also, there are two other weird leapers that i'm sure would hardly be in any games, these are the 'root-65-leaper' (8-1), (7-4) and the 'root-85-leaper' (9-2), (7-6). I was thinking of putting them in the promotional line to the rook, after the 'fiveleaper', but it wont work on a 10x10 board haha, so, sadly, i'm thinking of a 'sky high' variant with these leapers on a 12x12 board.
anyways, thanks for your comments and interest in the game :)
ok, i found where i got the name 'lancer' from, this page here,
http://www.ktn.freeuk.com/9a.htm#%282%29
Charles Gilman proposed Charlais for the 4:2 leaper, I propose templar, because the Knights Templar seal shows two knights sharing a single horse. Hugs & Kisses!
I never saw 3:3 + 0:3 and a 4:4 + 0:4 compound. A hint: always take a look in Taikoku Shogi it might have not only the piece, but a poetic name too, another good source is Adrian King's work. Hugs & Kisses, or send me a good beer! ;) (Sorry I'm a carioca brazilian and I love to play, tease, with people I admire and like).
My term for the 4:2 leaper is actually Charolais, after the livestock breeds - you've made me look vainer than I am! The combined 7:4 and 8:1 leaper is the Bat of John Savard's Leaping Bat Chess. More to follow when I've had time to write it up offline.
yes i've noticed John Savard's 'Leaping Bat Chess', how he calls the 'root-65-leaper' the 'Bat'. Alfaerie Graphics has a bat graphic so i better use this graphic for this piece, lol. Hard to see much info on the 'root-85-leaper', (9-2), (7-6), got no idea right now what graphic to use for this, but, lol, i'm sure it will go down well what i use :)
Charles, if you just take a look on my first post (where I rated the game) you'll notice that the charlais was just a typo! There I used the correct name charolais. Hugs and still waiting for that beers (LOL)!
I took up the Bat, as it were, for Man and Beast 03 when I realised how well a flying mammal fitted my ideas for naming its components - the 8:1 Ibis as part of a sequence of bird names for near-Rookwise leapers leaping off the Flamingo, and the 7:4 Ibex as a similar name but after a 'standard' quadrupedal mammal. For 9:2 I kept up the bird theme with a suitably unwieldy Albatross, while 8:7 I termed Curate as part of a sequence of churchmen for near-Bishopwise leapers. The combined root-85 leaper I termed Priestess as bird+churchman=woman suitably echoed the radial linepieces.
Unfortunately, Ibis is a well established and published name for the (1,5)-leaper, see e.g., here: http://www.dieschwalbe.de/lexikon.htm
From the same source: Interstingly, german and english names diverge for the (2,4)-leaper. While by Jeliss, the name lancer is well established, there is the german name 'Hase' (meaning hare).
Thank you very much for the link there Mr. Knappen (i can't read your first name, webpage doesn't show 2nd letter, is it 'Jorg'). That page looks fantastic, lots of info, but it's in german right, lol, dang i can't read it lol. I can make out some stuff though, and yes the 5-1 leaper there is called 'Ibis', and, come to think of it, i don't know if i have ever seen the 5-1 even mentioned. Also that page show's the 'flamingo', and besides this site, that is another leaper that is not mentioned on other pages too, i don't think George Jelliss has it on his page. Also, that page gives two names for the 4-2 leaper, 'Lancer' and 'Hase'. Mr. Jelliss also calls 4-2 leaper 'Lancer', so, this page is not connected with him, right? Oh, Charles, who is 'Torsten Linss', u give a link to some problems he composed about the 'flamingo'.
J.K.:
This is quite a claim from someone who in September 2002 said here: 'I have collected the names of leapers from several sources, the (1,5)-leaper is yet unnamed to my knowledge.' Subsequent comments include my March 2003 suggestion of Zemel for 5:1 and April 2003 suggestion of Ibis for 8:1, but no immeditae objection. Do you know whether the usage that you describe is a problematist's, or whether it has ever been used in a game? There is a strong tendency on these pages to disregard problematists' usage - my own adoption of, and extrapolation from, Sexton for 2:1:1 is something of an exception. Certainly few here feel any obligation to call Rook+Knight Empress rather than the Marshal or Chancellor of established variants such as Capablanca Chess.
This is quite a claim from someone who in September 2002 said here: 'I have collected the names of leapers from several sources, the (1,5)-leaper is yet unnamed to my knowledge.' Subsequent comments include my March 2003 suggestion of Zemel for 5:1 and April 2003 suggestion of Ibis for 8:1, but no immeditae objection. Do you know whether the usage that you describe is a problematist's, or whether it has ever been used in a game? There is a strong tendency on these pages to disregard problematists' usage - my own adoption of, and extrapolation from, Sexton for 2:1:1 is something of an exception. Certainly few here feel any obligation to call Rook+Knight Empress rather than the Marshal or Chancellor of established variants such as Capablanca Chess.
C.B.-J.: I've never heard of him. How did you find out about him to set up your link to his problems?
Charles: You owe me an apologie! After all you acused me to made you look vain, when it' was clearly a typo!!!! Does the the words:'Sorry Claudio. You right! I'm didn't noticed the first comment!'. Aren't in your vocabulary??!! The lack of a apologie really did you look vain, after all uncapable to admit that you made a minor mistake. At least GEORGE DUKE PAYS ATENTION IN WHAT I WRITE!
i'm not fully sure what is going on around here but it's entertaining. *makes popcorn*
I'm sure Charles was speaking in jest and doesn't owe you an apology for anything. He made a light-hearted comment, not an accusation.
Sorry if I offended anyone. The original comment was well over a year agoi and I'd been reading recent comments on all subjects rather than all comments on this one (from a link some way down the home page).
📝Joe Joyce wrote on Mon, Jan 17, 2011 08:26 AM UTC:Please pardon my intrusion, Christine, gentlemen. As an editor, I insist on a certain amount of decorum in these pages, and request that the topic be confined more or less to chess or something similar. Further, certain comments may cross boundaries that should not be crossed on this site. I have edited part of a comment out, and will continue to remove comments I deem offensive for a child-friendly chess variants site while I am an editor. Disagreements are fine, but they must be carried on in a civil fashion. I fully understand passions of many sorts may run high for many reasons, but I also see, from my English-only viewpoint, that there are often misunderstandings as we all try to communicate in this one language. Claudio, Fergus is quite right - Charles was not making that comment seriously. Further, he has apologized for this totally unintentional slight... I request that those involved in this or other disputations look at what they have written and what they will write, and delete any personal or offensive comments. I do not wish to have to do it for you. I really do not like doing this. I remind everyone this site is looked at by thousands of children as well as adults. Please make your comments with our total audience in mind. Again, Christine, my apologies. Your excellent game's comment page is no place for this. I hope everyone will take my not too subtle hints and make appropriate amends, so we can forget about this, and get on with the serious business of arguing chess. Thank you. Joe
To Charles Gilman:
In fact, my comment from 2002 reflects my knowledge I had at that time. There was a strange gap with the Flamingo alreay being named, but the (1,5)-leaper was left without a name.
Die Schwalbe is one of the leading problemist's journals (hey, they have journals allowing them to standardise on names!), therefore I consider their usage as well established. The Schwalbe reference gives no date when the name Ibis was assigned to (1,5) leaper, but here you can find a problem from 1999 using the Ibis:
www.softdecc.com/pdb/search.pdb?expression=CREATIONDATE%3E=20101230
(a quick google search with 'ibis chess problem' turned up this page as first hit).
To Christine: My first name is Jörg iwth an O-umlaut as second letter.
ah that's ok Joe, all is fine now i hope, i kind of didn't even realise things got out of hand a bit here. Let's all forgive and be friends, i know the nameing of pieces can sometimes cause 'friction' among people, but let's try to remember, it's not really that much of a big deal hehe. I don't want to get off the topic here, but, i am going to update this game (hehe) to fix the 'early check' problem arising from the 'trippers' on h1 and h10. At first i was going to simply remove them and not even replace them with anything but i now i'm thinking i could replace them with the 'threeleaper'. I know Jeremy Good has played a few games of 'Sky' on game courier here and wanted to know his opinion of this. Anyone who has thoughts on this i would be interested to hear too. Thanks all.
As I say, this is not primarily a problematists' page. I wasn't that surprised to see the Flamingo but no 5:1 piece as the latter is colourbound (just as there is a Zebrarider page but no Camelrider one). I have now used the Zemel in variants, and it does convey that it is to the Zebra wha tthe Camel is to the Knight. It even suggests the use of a camel-shaped image with zebra stripes.
Charles, I will not ask you to assign the name Ibis to the Zemel (we can live with multiple names for the same piece), but IMO you should consider giving the (1,8)-leaper another name.
Well that would be a dangerous precedent. Caliph, Empress, Ibis, Kangaroo, and Princess are all names with one use in Man and Beast and another for problematists. All the Man and Beast uses now appear in variants - mostly in mine but note Timothy Newton's Outback Chess. The first three appear in my Armies of Faith series, all based on the names that they use. What should I do with that lot, change the names or the pieces? If I keep the pieces with new names they won't fit the theme. If I keep the names but as the problematists use them they won't relate to the rest of the pieces properly - and they'll clash with my use of the same pieces under their MAB names elsewhere. AOF 5 already uses the piece that problmatists call Empress, the Marshal.
The simple truth is, variant designers rejected problematist names long before I joined these pages, and problematists rejected names from variants still earlier. The problematists had their chance when naming the Rook+Knight and Bishop+Knight compounds. They had a lot to choose from if they could be bothered to research them, but they just came up with new ones. It was in search of 'the' standard set of names (esp. for 3d pieces as it happened) that I found these pages. Had a consensus built up over both communities I would have been the first to go along with it but none had. From what little I've seen of problematists on these pages I get the impression that we don't even featuire on their radar. Why should we stick up for their usages when they've never stuck up for ours? Sorry for all the passion, but it really is too late to do anything about it.
I don't think we should see problemists and chess mathematicians as a kind of enemy camp. And: As long as chess variant inventors are ignorant to prior art, why should anyone else care. A striking example is Seirawan/Harper chess: Allthough there are established and sometimes even well-known names for the Rook-Night compund and the Bishop-Knight compound, they came up with new names. Even worse, their new names are established for pieces with other moves. As I say: With their (peer reviewed!) journals problemists have a far better infrastructure than chess variantists can even dream of. We have this web site and wikipedia. Neither of the two media is peer-reviewed.
Perhaps not enemies, but certainly very uncommunicativbe neighbours. The point is, it is only if a name has been used for a piece in sn actual variant that we should worry about using the name for a different piece. Perhaps you do not realise how much work went into Man and Beast. A renaming of one piece often leads to the renaming of many more. When I realised that certain cubic pieces were also Tetrahedral ones and te significance of semi-duals it meant that te cubic and hex root-19 leapers were associted wit different cubic root-38 leapers and so required different names. Fortunately I had created relatively few compounds of them at the time. When I decided that Muskrat would be a better name for the 8:2:1 cubic leaper than the more generic Myomorph, that knocked out Mustang, and Mustang's replacement Ringaui knocked out Irregular, and it all eventually developed into a chain of changes. Pieces connected with the Ibis include Beau, Bemel, Bijou, Bimel, Ibex, Isis, Ixion, Landyman, Ledge, Lump, Pandyman, Pledge, Pump, Pyramid, Yramid, and no doubt many others.
For me, it's ok, but I always clearly show whem I'm kidding and ask for apologies after the joke; what was not the case, in this game that can be seen in one of my comments to C.B.-J (joke and apologies). Christine: as we dont have Alfaerie for these pieces, I guess, put a little who's who. Thanks and kisses! BTW: Christine where are you from?
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.