Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Seirawan chess


  • 5 years ago · Quote · #1

    staggerlee

    I know this has been suggested before, but I thought to at least create a thread here about it and maybe stir up more interest, and possibly get some response from someone on the staff on what the status may be on incorporating Seirawan Chess on the site, whether the answer be, 1. Never 2. Someday, maybe 3. Someday, definitely 4. We're working on it now 5. Very soon!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #2

    Patzer24

    At this point I believe #1 would be correct.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #3

    contrapunctus

    doh

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #4

    staggerlee

    shucks, was hoping at least for a someday maybe.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #5

    Awick17

    I for one would definitely enjoy a Seirawan chess option here on chess.com.  The response from chess960 has been extremely positive, and I think the same would follow if S-chess was added.

    Another advantage of the addition of S-chess would be to continue luring members to here from ICC. As far as I know, ICC does not have such a feature, and that would potentially increase membership here.

    Hopefully S-Chess will be considered, as it is an exciting variant of chess.

    -Wicksta85

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #6

    CerebralAssassin

    I'd love to see this feature integrated.It's a way to avoid memorizing a lot of openings associated with standard chess,and I nice suplement to 960!!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #7

    oinquarki

    The problem with adding Seirawan chess is this: If you have Seirawan and 960, you might as well add in bughouse, and if you have that, might as well add crazyhouse, and if you have so many variants already, you might as well add in another, and another, and another...

    So eventually chess.com has to spend more and more time and money to satisfy less and less fans of specific variants. And that is very bad for business.

     

    P.S. I'm not saying this because I don't want there to be Seirawan chess on this site. In fact I really like Seirawan chess. I'm saying this because I don't want people to think that Erik and Co. are not giving you what you want because they're jerks.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #8

    ogi-

    so glad to see others suggesting this too, I would LOVE to see Seirawan chess implemented on chess.com

    not only would you guys be doing us (the community) a favor but it would also be a major step forward for S-chess.  Furthermore, being the only website on the internet to support s-chess would definitely attract some newcomers so why not give us loyal members a treat while helping Seirawan chess spread while letting Seirawan chess help chess.com?  Everyone would win!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #9

    staggerlee

    I wonder just how motivated Yasser Seirawan is to popularize this variant, because Chess.com obviously has an interest in recruiting titled players to use the site, do vote chess games, make video lectures and chess mentor courses.  So it seems like a perfect marriage, they create the online app to let millions play Seirawan's variant, and he makes some videos for the site, plays a vote chess game against the members, etc.  Seems like a win-win situation.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #10

    staggerlee

    oinquarki wrote:

    The problem with adding Seirawan chess is this: If you have Seirawan and 960, you might as well add in bughouse, and if you have that, might as well add crazyhouse, and if you have so many variants already, you might as well add in another, and another, and another...

    So eventually chess.com has to spend more and more time and money to satisfy less and less fans of specific variants. And that is very bad for business.

     

    P.S. I'm not saying this because I don't want there to be Seirawan chess on this site. In fact I really like Seirawan chess. I'm saying this because I don't want people to think that Erik and Co. are not giving you what you want because they're jerks.


    I don't really think a "slippery slope" type argument works in this situation.  If there's enough interest among the users of this site in playing S-Chess that it outweighs the cost of creating the app, then it is a good idea.  Adding S-Chess doesn't mean they would have to add any other variant, although adding it may draw more and more chess variant enthusiasts to the site, which again is no negative at all. Adding new members, and especially premium members to the site is a good thing, regardless of whether what drew them in was regular chess or the variants.  And I think one good way to add new members is to offer something that can't be found elsewhere, which at the moment at least, S-Chess is.

    The thing that would really help this discussion move along would be to have the input of someone who knows a thing or two about developing web apps.  To me and a few others who know nothing of such matters, it seems at least that it would be a simple thing.  One reason it seems like it would be simple is that S-Chess uses the same 8x8 board, and the two new pieces have the same movement powers of already existing chess pieces, just in combination.  The biggest difference I think is that the new pieces are dropped in after the start of the game.  If it's not actually easy to create I'd like very much to be educated on the matter.  There's a big difference between requesting a feature that will require 25 man-hours of work and one that will take 100 or 1000 or more. But part of why this forum topic should be discussed is to find out whether it would be worth it for the staff to devote the time to it.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #11

    oinquarki

    staggerlee wrote:
    oinquarki wrote:

    The problem with adding Seirawan chess is this: If you have Seirawan and 960, you might as well add in bughouse, and if you have that, might as well add crazyhouse, and if you have so many variants already, you might as well add in another, and another, and another...

    So eventually chess.com has to spend more and more time and money to satisfy less and less fans of specific variants. And that is very bad for business.

     

    P.S. I'm not saying this because I don't want there to be Seirawan chess on this site. In fact I really like Seirawan chess. I'm saying this because I don't want people to think that Erik and Co. are not giving you what you want because they're jerks.


    I don't really think a "slippery slope" type argument works in this situation.  If there's enough interest among the users of this site in playing S-Chess that it outweighs the cost of creating the app, then it is a good idea.  Adding S-Chess doesn't mean they would have to add any other variant, although adding it may draw more and more chess variant enthusiasts to the site, which again is no negative at all. Adding new members, and especially premium members to the site is a good thing, regardless of whether what drew them in was regular chess or the variants.  And I think one good way to add new members is to offer something that can't be found elsewhere, which at the moment at least, S-Chess is.

    The thing that would really help this discussion move along would be to have the input of someone who knows a thing or two about developing web apps.  To me and a few others who know nothing of such matters, it seems at least that it would be a simple thing.  One reason it seems like it would be simple is that S-Chess uses the same 8x8 board, and the two new pieces have the same movement powers of already existing chess pieces, just in combination.  The biggest difference I think is that the new pieces are dropped in after the start of the game.  If it's not actually easy to create I'd like very much to be educated on the matter.  There's a big difference between requesting a feature that will require 25 man-hours of work and one that will take 100 or 1000 or more. But part of why this forum topic should be discussed is to find out whether it would be worth it for the staff to devote the time to it.


     Yeah, I guess you're right.

    Note that there are already 2 groups on chess.com that play Seirawan chess without an interactive board, so if chess.com doesn't make their own you can still play there.

    http://www.chess.com/groups/home/results-may-vary

    http://www.chess.com/groups/view/seirawan-chess-fans

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #12

    whiskeyshelf

    Without being an expert web designer, but knowing a little bit about code, it seems like this would be easier to program instead of 960....

    1) You need to write the code for the the new pieces, which would basically combine the codes of knight-rook, knight-bishop (I'll bet the queen is simply a combined code of bishop-rook), and design an icon for each piece..hell, I'd even settle for a moving capital E and capital H for starters haha

    2) Some sort of option where you can double click a back rank square that has been vacated and have an option to introduce the piece..and a code that states this can only be done after the first move off the back space....OR....a pop up window (just like the one for when a pawn is promoted) that happens the first time a piece moves from it's back rank square...the promotion options would be Hawk, Elephant, or Cancel, if you didn't want to promote at that time....either option seems not too terrible to program IMO 

    No new boards/positions to program, castling rules are exactly the same (again, easier than the 960 code)...it really doesn't seem like it would be too terrible....cmon, web designers, u can do it!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #13

    staggerlee

    whiskeyshelf wrote:

     and design an icon for each piece..hell, I'd even settle for a moving capital E and capital H for starters haha


    This part could be turned into a fun competition.  See who can design the best icons for the hawk and the elephant, and whoever wins gets a free month of diamond membership or something.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #14

    oinquarki

    Good?

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #15

    wingtzun

    Personally, I am here to play proper 'classical' chess and improve in this game. 960 I can cope with. Seirawan Chess - no need!

    Don't get me wrong - it looks a good game, BUT IT AIN'T CHESS!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #16

    staggerlee

    mkirk wrote:

    Personally, I am here to play proper 'classical' chess and improve in this game. 960 I can cope with. Seirawan Chess - no need!

    Don't get me wrong - it looks a good game, BUT IT AIN'T CHESS!


    One of the positives of adding S-Chess is that you wouldn't be obligated to play, but welcome to if you want.  And as for your comment that "It ain't chess" of all the variants I've played, S-Chess retains more of a "normal chess feel" than any of the others, even Chess960, since you start the game with exactly the same set-up.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #17

    fjandinn

    I would even become a diamond member for this option!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #18

    hsbgowd

    I am neither for or against Chess.com introducing Seirawans chess.

    I have not played before but wonder if it is really enjoyable. I feel chess board is already cluttered with so many pieces and adding hawk and elephant to it will just invite players to go in for exchanges, or play will extend for a longer duration if the game is closed. Can somebody who has played that before comment if there is fun in playing in Seirawans chess.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #19

    staggerlee

    I played it with some friends OTB and I even bought the pieces from House of Staunton.  I think it's a ton of fun.  Sometimes the board is a bit crowded, and there's a lot of power on the board with the new pieces, but it's a lot of fun.  Openings are "blown up", that is, take any familiar opening and it's fresh and exciting since you have the new element of having the freedom to introduce the new pieces to whatever squares you decide on the back row.

    It makes every stage of the game interesting and exciting because there are all kinds of new tactical possibilities with these pieces.  Middlegame tactics are complex and thrilling.  Endgames are really a whole new game.  Imagine promoting a pawn to one of the new pieces.  Currently endgames are pretty cut and dry, we all know which ones are winning and which are losing, but it's less clear when you're talking about Hawk vs Queen, or Elephant vs Hawk, or Elephant vs Rook and Bishop, or whathaveyou.  I think it's a ton of fun, otherwise I wouldn't be advocating for it so emphatically.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #20

    oinquarki

    I just tried to mate with a hawk and king against a lone king on the analysis board. It's just like the 2 knight mate; if your opponent makes a mistake it's possible, but if both sides play the best moves I don't think there is a way to force mate with just a hawk.

    Since the people reading this thread are likely to be Seirawan chess players, can somebody please confirm or deny my theory?


Back to Top

Post your reply: