- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu or go directly to Los Alamos Chess).
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)
Списък с дискусии
Тук не Ви е разрешено да публикувате съобщения. Изисква се ниво на членство най-малко Мозъчна Пешка.
FromHell: i have not played many games but am yet to play in one wehre a pawn was promoted ... but I would agree that the pawn is more powerful, not just becuse it promotes fast beut it controls a higher percdntage of the board than in normal chess (a central pawn controls 1/18th of hte board here whereas in normal chess it only controls 1/32nd ... nearly twice the power) likewise knights centrally control 8/36, nearly a quarter of the board whereas rooks will only control 10/36ths. This is a simplistic appraisla but you can see where it leads.
There has been much discussion on peice values in the 10x8 thread over the years, including methods for determining the values. you might find it interesting to read through there ... you could try a search using "piece value".
I've got a question to the more experienced players of Los Alamos Chess. I'm relatively new at this kind of game, so I don't have good understanding of it (playing it only just for fun).
In my opinion, in Los Alamos Chess pawns are stronger than in normal chess, because the board is smaller (-> faster promotion of pawns -> faster control of board), and pawns have to do the the job of the missing bishops (e.g.covering the diagonals).
So I'm interested if I'm wrong with this idea, that there is a movement of strength of the pieces to normal chess, or if it is only theoretical and isn't noticealbe while playing game.
Liontamer: Well, together with robtoo, Bigboulix is the best of the best on this site, and I believe that not only here. He has a great "insight" into the essence of all the games he plays, no matter whether it is Los Alamos Chess or Hyper Backgammon.
I would like to express my sincere admiration for Bigboulix who has regained first rank in Los Alamos Chess by beating sasufix, a former solid 1900 player, in seven consecutive games within less than 24 hours! All seven games are great steps ahead in the elaboration of Los Alamos opening theory as well as in the development of tactical and strategic patterns of this variant.
My personal favourite is this little gem, which clearly shows the superior understanding of the game by Bigboulix:
I'm glad that this happened while my games vs. sasufix are still in progress, so that I don't gain unjustified rating points from a player who had an unjustified 1900+ BKR and now shows that he is worth only 1700+. This provides an excellent incentive to play for a win now, because a draw against such a weak player will rightfully cost me some BKR points.
***Edited to correct links at Liontamers request***
Thad: Since I was asked to play in the Los Alamos team tournament for The Untouchables, I have been studying this game for a while. I think that white has a big advantage going first because I feel they can control the center much easier than in 8x8 chess and I think center control is more important in this game rather than 8x8. And moving first = opportunity to control center first. Those statistics don't really say white has a blatant advantage but after a month of studying openings in Los Alamos, I would rather be white in every game if it was possible!
(скрий) Ако четете редовно само някои от дискусиите, можете да ги добавите в списъка си с любими дискусии като отидете на страницата и чукнете на "Добави към любимите ми дискусии". (pauloaguia) (покажи всички подсказки)