101 Reasons I Hate Chess #76 - 98: Variants

This is all about love and hate. And where they intersect in my chess. And sometimes bisect.

We won't talk about everything chess. But we will give brief shoutouts to the following: Players, Bloggers & Streamers; Game Ending Conclusions; How to Improve at Chess; The Pieces; Openings and Endings; Variants that use a Standard Board; Variants that use Nonstandard Boards; and finish with Clocks and Time Controls.

76-80. Variants that use a Standard Board
76. King of the Hill 
What's next? A Ring around the Rosie variant? [The poem may have origins in the bubonic plague. Oh, that's a fine starting point...NOT! But bear with me as I digress...a frequent occurrence in my ramblings/stream of conscious style. In my presumptive "Ring around the Rosie" variant, play can only occur on the first two ranks of each side and along the a, b, g, and h-files. No worries about controlling the center now!!) Or perhaps a chess version of "Red rover, red rover, send a piece (of the opponent's choice) on over." And then attempt to trap that piece. Hmm...on second thought...I am the author of a book on trapping pieces, so perhaps this variant would appeal to me.]

Moving back to the variant that is the brunt of my hatred, my historical bent constantly has me asking, "Which came first, the Bongcloud opening or King of the Hill?" And what happens when negative transference finds me running my King to the center in standard chess because I'd just binged on 24 hours of King of the Hill. Sierra hotel.

77. Fischer Random/Chess960/Freestyle Chess 
Sure, just when I've spent enough years learning a few openings to occasionally take down a titled player if they wander into one of my sweet spots, the titans of the chess world change the game. No more classical opening theory, no sirree. Instead, just to evade that tiny chink in their armor, they're monetizing this variant for the top players in the world...like they need any more help against my ilk. Carlsen, Buettner Unveil Extravagant Chess960 Grand Slam Tour Across Five Continents. Thanks so much!! 

78. Three Check 
On the plus side, it reinforces a mindset of keeping a very wary eye on the f2 and f7 squares. On the downside, there are already basic concepts in place and even some theory. I just wish someone create a version that uses Chess960 setups to avoid what has already allowed knowledge of some simple plans to flourish in Three Check based on the classic piece placements. After all, I need all the help I can get against people who have spent some time thinking about those f2 and f7 squares, not to mention some other unpleasant tricks of the trade.

79. Suicide Chess 
Well, first there's the name. Most societies have cultural norms that abhor suicide as a solution. Hmm...what else? Actually, I kind of find this variant relaxing. I just cannot bring myself to take seriously the notion of losing all one's pieces to win the game, so it's kick back, drink a beer, and go with the flow. No pressure. Kind of a relief. The real pain involved here is choosing between captures if you get caught up in winning. Not that a type-A personality, such as I, would ever care about winning.

80. Bughouse 
Here's my first problem. I lived in a bug house. Technically, a bug-infested house. So, this gives me the willies to start with. Second, I've watched these blitz-happy games. And there are actual strategies and tactics for the experts. It's amazing to watch! Although there is nothing more depressing when both sides reach a mutual zugzwang (#20-21) and the best strategy is for both sides to stop moving and let the clocks run down to almost nothing. And then try to blitz out a victory in what is now a bullet game. And we'll get to my loathing of bullet chess (#100).

81-98. Variants that use Nonstandard Boards
Time to move beyond the binding confines of 64 traditional squares! First of all, as any serious gamer knows, hexagons are the preferred formatting. That way it's the same distance from the center of any hex to any adjoining hex. Important stuff in board battles!! But let's stick to a bit more conventional approach first, shall we? We'll get back to the hexagons later. After which I abandon completely any thoughts of playing chess with hex (perhaps it should be called "chex"😉).

81. Symmetric Chess - On a 9 by 9 board!

Symmetric Chess (chessvariants.org)

Oy, vay. Now we have extra Queens who will no doubt feel doubly venturesome and find themselves trapped needlessly. Probably for as simple a reason as forgetting that one, and only one, of the enemy Bishops must move one square and change color on its first move. And a flighty Queen will be sure to have forgotten that. So, at least two reasons to hate this one. Maybe more. But my abacus is running out of beads. As is your patience, no doubt.

82-87. Centennial Chess - 100 squares of glorious freedom and new pieces!

CENTENNIAL CHESS (chessvariants.org)

Six new pieces. SIX!! O-k-a-y, ne'er mind. That's way too much for me to comprehend, even with an early morning cuppa joe in front of me. Although emotionally I feel quite favorably towards the lions. If only they could have added some tigers and bears. Meanwhile, camels are filthy, mean beasts who as soon spit in your eye as look at you.

And the spearmen (spearperson? spearmint?) bring to mind hoplites. Now, if only I knew what a hoplite was, but I'm afraid my knowledge of ancient Greek history fails me at the moment. Are there hopheavies? Or is that making a hashish of the situation?

Sigh. If only I had stewards to counsel me. Oh, wait. I do in this variant.😁 Bottom line: I hate each and every new piece because I have to learn how they move and coordinate: stewards, camels, three types of spearman (middle, left, and right), and lions. Even without double counting, that is six reasons to hate this variant. Groan. At least the pawns are still the same distance apart. Though I have no idea why that trivial factoid should console me.

88-90. Hexagonal Chess - 91 cells on which to ambush and trap the enemy!
88. A construct originally conceived in the 19th century has now invaded our sanctified software spaces. Well, okay. Nothing is pristine on the web. But you do get an extra member of the religious hierarchy to add to your team! No more Bishop pair questions. It's gotten worse! Now the holy trinity travels on three different colors, never exchanging views, unless they occasionally slant sidelong glances at the heretics of the other colors. Hate it!

Glinski's Hexagonal Chess (chessvariants.com) 
89. OMG. Just look at the starting position and how the pieces move. On the plus side, His Majesty has some additional freedom, though it resembles the awkward jumps of classical knights. On the negative side of the scale, this color scheme gives me a migraine. No ordinary headache, an out-and-out migraine. Shards of light splinter behind my closed eyelids. What witch has hexed me, I ask myself, that I chose to delve into this devilish chess configuration with its outrageous color scheme. Tis no wonder the Archbishop of Canterbury banned chess, clearly the tool of demons, from his congregation in the year of our Lord, 1291. And at one time the Orthodox church banned the game due to its gambling nature. (As a side note, it therefore should come as no surprise that many titled players have taken up poker as a profitable sideline career. Jennifer Shahade and Boris Avetik are prime examples.)

90. Is this variant enough to drive me bonkers? So that I soon find myself hosting Mad Hatter tea parties? Well, the Scientific American Magazine, July 1859, article Chess Playing Excitement, contributed to speculation amongst many that chess playing contributed to insanity. Future articles touted the deaths of Steinitz and Murphy as examples. Certainly, this board drives me nuts!

Hmm...perhaps not. Even though a friend of mine had a mother who insisted that he see an analyst because of his passion for the Royal Game. Sigh. She'd have been better off spending that money on a chess coach for him.

91-98. Four Player Chess
Eight versions of the board, eight reasons to hate this one!! Even more versions to hate if you count the inexplicable "four half-boards that can be joined in every possible way." Escher would have loved that one. So, I tried to imagine that below.

Sigh, they can't even agree on the board design. Let alone whether your partner sits next to you or across the "board"? Those ridiculous circular boards remind me of that hideous math joke about the radius of a circle, "Pie are not square. Cake are square. Pie are round." Surely you jest? No. And don't call me Shirley.

That said, the mathematician in me quite likes the challenge of determining how four half-boards can be connected in every possible way. Particularly since there seems to be no restriction that limits the connections to a single plane. This could quickly escalate into a tower. Sigh. Below is my initial vision of the eighth option, four half-boards connected in every way possible. On a side note, it's too bad it wouldn't be possible to develop a tesseract...to the best of my knowledge. For those of you who are not cursed with more math knowledge than you ever got to use in real life, a tesseract is a four-dimensional hypercube. 

Okay, bottom line. I have enough difficulties with two-player chess. Now you want to double the number of opponents and pieces, increase the number of squares, and pair me with another player in some kind of cooperative effort. Yeah. Right. Paraphrasing the Neanderthal kid in one of Gary Larson's The Far Side cartoons, "May I be excused? My brain is full." 

Not counted. My proposal for smaller boards! (Please feel free to skip this section!!!)
I did not, nay could not, count this one since, thankfully, it does not exist. But I do enjoy the mental exercise of searching for memes with which to torture both myself and those few readers who may also tend to love puns and mental anguish.
One benefit to my proposal is that it would eliminate the need for Armageddon Chess in playoffs. Instead of bidding on colors by offering a specific time on the clock, the players would instead play the first tiebreaker on a board of only 49 squares, a 7 by 7 layout. But there would still be a decision process as they would have to choose which seven pieces to deploy. A king since, perforce, one must acknowledge the point of the royal game is regicide. One, and only one, queen, though selecting a queen is not mandatory. And no more than two of any other particular pieces could be selected, so no more than two rooks, bishops, or knights. And the players get to choose where to deploy them. So, it would be possible to have two bishops on the same color! After all, why not? After selecting their pieces, the players would take turns placing one piece at a time on the board. And are allowed a maximum of sixty seconds to place each piece.  So, the best of Fischer Random and Stratego(TM)! Dice are rolled, or bingo cards filled, to determine who has to place a piece first.

Note that in case of a subsequent draw, the board would be reduced to 36 squares, with a 6 by 6 configuration, as seen below. And so on. Until reaching a king and pawn endgame that would be a dual stalemate, by definition. The tournament sponsor would simply have to pony up the cash for an additional, identical trophy. That could prove troublesome if, like the Stanley Cup, the trophy changes hands annually.

Note that if drawn results continue until play is reduced to a 2 by 2 board, then the players might each choose a Knight as their second piece. Why? Because knights can sometimes enforce checkmate on the first move given a 2x2 board! So, the strategy of when and where to place pieces becomes paramount, given that king safety is the be-all and end-all of chess existence (Analyze with KIMPLODES! K = King Safety). Accordingly, after the pieces are placed one additional rule is enforced. A coin flip determines who has the first move. In the potential position shown below, White to move would win with 1.axb3#. If Black wins the coin flip the result will be entered in the archives as 1...bxa2#. Wonderful David and Goliath mates, dontcha think! 🤣