Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Non-Random Fischer Random? Could It Work?


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1

    Teary_Oberon

    I just had a 'random' thought today: what if the piece positions for Fischer Random (960) chess weren't random at all, but rather were deliberately chosen by each side? To keep it balanced, the process could go something like:

    1. Each player secretly writes their desired piece positions on a piece of paper (or enter the data into the computer before the game).
    2. Once the players have written down their piece positions, they both reveal at the same time, and then must place the pieces in accordance with what was written.

    This could add a new and interesting layer of strategy to the game could it not?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #2

    Meadmaker

    My biggest fear would be that it would dramatically increase the white player's first turn advantage.  At the end of the first placement, there would only be 160 possibilities.  White has further chances to whittle down on his next placements, and you might be able to trim it enough to do some memorization and gain a huge advantage, exactly what 960 is supposed to avoid.

    I don't know that, though.  It just seems like it could happen.

     

    For what it's worth, Burmese Chess starts by placing the pieces on the board, one at a time, subject to some constraints.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #3

    Teary_Oberon

    Meadmaker wrote:

    My biggest fear would be that it would dramatically increase the white player's first turn advantage.  At the end of the first placement, there would only be 160 possibilities.  White has further chances to whittle down on his next placements, and you might be able to trim it enough to do some memorization and gain a huge advantage, exactly what 960 is supposed to avoid.

    I don't know that, though.  It just seems like it could happen.

     

    For what it's worth, Burmese Chess starts by placing the pieces on the board, one at a time, subject to some constraints.


    hmm...yes that might be true in a way...but in another way it would be dangerous for either white (or black) to stay with only one or two setups, because then his opponents could predict him from game history and think up counter-arrangements.

    That is the extra layer of stategy I was thinking of--the need to predict your opponent's setup and think up original counter-setups before the game even starts. >_>

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #4

    TimeLord2

    It seems the begining of the game would all rely on luck against your opponent. Makes me think of minesweeper...

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #5

    HGMuller

    There is a very simple rule for equalizing the white advantage. Start the game as follows:

    1) The white player makes a move.

    2) The black player now decides if he wants to swap colors.

    So if white has the initially better position, and does a move that preserves the advantage, black will prefer the swap, and acquire the advantage. If white does a very poor move, giving an advantage to black, black will not swap, and thus keep the advantage. The only way for white to not give black the advantage is to play a move that exactly equalizes the position. Not to good, and not to bad.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #6

    Teary_Oberon

    HGMuller wrote:

    There is a very simple rule for equalizing the white advantage. Start the game as follows:

    1) The white player makes a move.

    2) The black player now decides if he wants to swap colors.

    So if white has the initially better position, and does a move that preserves the advantage, black will prefer the swap, and acquire the advantage. If white does a very poor move, giving an advantage to black, black will not swap, and thus keep the advantage. The only way for white to not give black the advantage is to play a move that exactly equalizes the position. Not to good, and not to bad.


    But if you give black the power to change sides after the first move, then couldn't the black player exploit that by deliberately making his own piece setup terrible and then always swapping?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #7

    Teary_Oberon

    TimeLord2 wrote:

     

    It seems the begining of the game would all rely on luck against your opponent. Makes me think of minesweeper...


    If the two sides each had a different, uncontrolled random setup then yes it probably would be luck, much like being dealt a hand of cards. But being able to choose your own setup IMO takes it out of the realm of luck and into the realm of strategy based on past game history, tactics and pyschology.

    Of course, my one fear in such a game would be people gravitating towards only a handful of "theoretically superior" setups instead of maintaining the variety and creativity :/

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #8

    AnthonyCG

    Laughing

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #9

    Teary_Oberon

    Cool

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #10

    Teary_Oberon

    LordNazgul wrote:

    Not sure what is being implied here, that there is a forced win in the position ? I doubt that any 960 position has a forced win in it.


    I just figured that he wanted to play a game >_>

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #11

    waffllemaster

    There's an interesting variant on a site called "it's your turn.com" called "Screen chess"

    Before the game begins, you're shown your pieces, and the 32 squares on your half of the board.  Both you and your opponent place them however you want (quadrupled pawns, even bishops on the same color, anything) and after you both set up the game begins.

    They have a lot of varients actually.  One fun one is where before the game each player selects any piece (other than a king) to be explosive.  At any point during the game, as a move, you can detonate that piece.  It's removed, but so are any pieces on one of the 8 surrounding squares.  If you make the piece a pawn, it may be captured in the opening and you don't get to use it.  If you seemingly arbitrarily retrete a piece, you may trick your opponant into thinking that's the explosive piece.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #12

    waffllemaster

    Anyway, yeah, non-random fischer random could work, but the starting position wouldn't be equal like it would be for classic chess.  So this variant would belong with the other fun ones I described.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #13

    Frankdawg

    This could work, and to even out the old "who goes first" question they toss a coin to see who is black or white at the start of the game.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #14

    Meadmaker

    Teary_Oberon wrote:
    HGMuller wrote:

    There is a very simple rule for equalizing the white advantage. Start the game as follows:

    1) The white player makes a move.

    2) The black player now decides if he wants to swap colors.

    So if white has the initially better position, and does a move that preserves the advantage, black will prefer the swap, and acquire the advantage. If white does a very poor move, giving an advantage to black, black will not swap, and thus keep the advantage. The only way for white to not give black the advantage is to play a move that exactly equalizes the position. Not to good, and not to bad.


    But if you give black the power to change sides after the first move, then couldn't the black player exploit that by deliberately making his own piece setup terrible and then always swapping?


     I missed a key point from the OP.  I had thought that, like Chess960, the board always begins symmetrically.  I had thought that white begins by placing a piece, such as a bishop in the corner.  That forces black to play a bishop opposite.  Black now decides to put the queen in the center, and so white puts the queen in the center, and decides what to do next.  Repeat until all the pieces are down.

     

    Using what is actually described in the OP introduces far more luck, because some setups seem certain to work well compared to other setups.

     

    It also makes the "pie rule", described where black makes the decision to swap, useless, for exactly the reason mentioned.  For a pie rule to work, it has to be based on the first player making a decision, and the second player deciding whether or not to stick with the decision.  As described in the OP, both players make a simultaneous decision, but black gets to decide what to do.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #15

    JeffBorowiak

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #16

    JeffBorowiak



Back to Top

Post your reply: