- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu)
- 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)
rabbitoid: you expressed it much better by pointing that a piece
must move to an un-occupied square - I enjoy to see the group intelligence
which is even higher than mine is lightly capable of fixing the prob ... ~*~ .
rabbitoid: That seems to make a simple rule. In regular Chess you can only move to an unoccupied square or one that is occupied by an opponent's piece. The Rook should be not be allowed to move to its starting square as it is occupied before it moves.
but apart from that, that's an idea for a new variant: you can take also your own pieces. for normal chess, this is idiotic, but for loop chess? sacrificing a piece to parachute far behind enemy lines? what do people think?
rabbitoid: If your looping rook would be an obstacle to itself, you have to decide, whether the rook should capture itself, or the move finally hereby is blocked. So you at last have the choice to declare this move to be impossible, or having unfinite multi-looping doubles.
Sumerian, danoschek: "it's chess..." well, no, it's not. it's a variant, which has a different set of rules. it says in the rules the only change is the possibility to extend the board so that it loops on itself. it follows that the only limitation to a rook move is that there be no pieces between the starting and ending point.
Sumerian's infinite regression is no obstacle, since there is the 3 move repetition draw rule.
hmmm... actually that's the way out of this loophole: when the rook starts the move, there IS someone standing on the target square: himself. question is, does this count as an obstacle, since the rook has to move out of it's starting position to reach the obstacle, which is therefore no longer an obstacle? this is starting to enter quantum physics... or in dano's favorite expression, humbug. for once I agree
Walter Montego: yes you don't see. like I don't see the admittably
challenging boardlogic complying with chess rules either ... btw it was me
who urged to repairing the en passant cross the border too - fixed already ... ~*~ .
danoschek: I don't play cCylinder Chess, but I fail to see how making a move that leaves the board in the same position would eliminate stalemates from happening. Since only a Queen, Rook, or Bishop (Hmm, I'm not sure about a Bishop) can make such a move and not the King, a stalemate cannot happen in this manner, can it? It could certainly facilitate in the making of a stalemate though. Suppose I moved my Rook all the way around the board and left the position the same, now a stalemate could indeed happen. That'd be my stupidity for allowing that to happen, wouldn't it? One thing I am curious about this is, suppose a Rook that I can move all the way back to the same square is blocking your Bishop from throwing a check on my King. I would say that the Rook cannot be considered to have moved. Simular to the situation to castling through a check even though the King isn't in check when the castling is completed. How does the game here handle this situation?
danoschek: An additional argument against such passing loopings is, that when cycling once creates a move, cycling twice will also do. How will you distinguish such a move from one making 222 cycles? Enumbering all valid moves will end in a never ending chaos. But identifying all into one 'move', will reduce them to a simple passing, which is not allowed at all.
reza: In Chess (and variants) there is a phaenomene called 'Zugzwang'. It is existing only, because there is no possibility in Chess to simply pass a move. Permitting moves which do not change the situation on the board thus will be nothing else than passing. Thus the Zugzwang element by that will vanish from Chess in such situations. Chess including a possibility to pass a move no longer remains Chess, it becomes a new type of game.
reza: It may not be useless... the position I posted when I started this whole thread 4 months ago has different outcomes if this is considered a valid move or not. Just to bring it back:
White: Ra5, ph6, Kc3
Black: Kb1, pa6, ph7
White to play, mate in 2
The proposed solution is
And in halma, as rabbitoid pointed out, you can have a move that doesn't change the board at all.
I'm not stating that this should be a valid move or not. I just pointed out what I read in a book, that's all and was wondering for your oppinions. But then again, I remeber a famous game in chess history where someone promoted a pawn to an opponent's piece. And it was considered a valid move at the time since the rules didn't say anything against it (that's why they've been changed *hint**hint*)
danoschek: not in all games. in checkers, you can have multiple jumps that end up where you started. in cylinder chess I see no reason why it should be disallowed. it comes to a "pass", but so what, if no rule forbids it?
Sumerian: I think as there is plenty of opportunity for diversion from any course there doesn't need to be a kibitzing rule. After all, there are a lot of sound first, second, and so on moves from almost any of the initial positions, so the play is largely a matter of taste. Also, correspondence is set up to allow maximum thought and opportunity for research for each player.
Well, in OTB tournaments you have no time to watch simultaneous played games. Here the situation is a little bit more complicated. May be it could help to disallow any kibitzing until move 5 of any random game.
In this way it would make games of the tournament more interesting, but in the current way it would help to see who plays better the current position or for FRC-Chess interested players(like me) it would help to generate some ideas about various setups......And as i've said in the current way there is no luck factor at all.........
Andromedical: I joined your tournament Andromedical. I haven't played much Dark Chess in awhile. I was hoping ol' Ed would join it for some Dark Chess, but thems the breaks. It looks like it starts in a few hours. Perhaps we can enlist a few more Dark Chess players?
Should be a fast paced tournament with a two day move limit.
Caissus: winboard/xboard manages fine the pgn used here. In windows you have to modify the shortcut to have the flag
winboard.exe /variant=crazyhouse the only problem with this interface is that it doesn't show the pieces off board, which is VERY annoying for this variant
Another reason why this should not be allowed:
A "move" is not the action of a piece travelling, but the action of putting a piece on a free square (or occupied by opponent, but that doesn't apply here). Since a5 is occupied, the R can't move there
again I point to the fine PDF document from the Frankfurt Chess Tigers.
You can find and download the PDF document (in German language) from the very
interesting Chess Tigers' home site at: http://www.chesstigers.de/download.php ( please search there for the link: Chess960 Startpositionen und Regeln ).
Subject: Huge response for the first Chess960 Computer World Championship
Hi friends of real chess programming!
In a very interesting article (German language) from the Frankfurt Chess Tigers
you can learn that there are already 20 participants. Thus it will be an event
huge and relevant for chess programming in August 2005, where the engines will
have o calculate from the beginning, not where a huge opening library might end.
I didn't realise this was your site Nabla ... I will add it above with a reference to the "home" page for AntiChess. Unfortunately for me it is in French (I will have to get my daughter to translate LOL).