4-Player Chess Wikibook

Some time ago I proposed the idea to create a Wikibook for 4-player chess, covering the rules, tactics and strategies and documenting the "opening theory" (for the Teams variant). I have now actually started a Wikibook, which can be found here, and everyone who is willing to contribute to it, can do so. The idea is to create something similar to the existing Wikibooks for regular chess (see Chess, Chess Opening Theory, Chess Strategy).

If you do plan to contribute to it, get familiar with Wikibooks first and make sure you do not violate any Wikibooks policies, to avoid getting blocked or having pages deleted. Wikibooks pages are continuously monitored by automated filters and by administrators to prevent vandalism and spam / advertisement. It's best to avoid including external links, unless absolutely necessary and justifiable. (I found out the hard way and got blocked immediately after referring to chess.com. )

Nice start. This will be very helpful.

Very nice

I have created a 4pc diagram template, so now diagrams can easily be added to the Wikibook to show positions.

Please add that "Stalemate is a Draw." in Teams. We added this phrase to the Rules in yesterday's release.

That was already in there actually.

To reiterate, the point of Wikibooks is that everyone can edit or contribute things. So, please, feel free to do so. The book won't write itself.  Each page also has a discussion page associated with it. So, if you want to make a change or add something and you're not sure how to go about it, you can always start a discussion with others to exchange opinions and ideas.

See the diagram template documentation.  (And have a look at the Conventions as well.)

You can choose between tright or tleft for the alignment or leave it out. I think it's better to use the large diagram only for the current position at the top and to use smaller diagrams (add size = 20) in the rest of the text when discussing positions that may be reached later, since the large diagrams take up quite some space. (You can also leave out the file and rank labels on one or both sides of the board with numbers = left, right, both or neither and letters = top, bottom, both or neither.)

Also, update the FEN4 of the position shown, if you include it in the diagram, or just leave it out. Common moves are just for quick navigation from the current position, so you don't have to include that in diagrams that show other positions.

To clarify, the idea is that each move will have its own subpage (like a directory) and each page covers the ideas in that particular position. You can highlight ideas using longer lines and show variations that may result from a particular move, like you did, but note that each move in those lines will also have its own dedicated subpage for more elaborate discussion of that particular position.

For example, the page /1._h3/1...c7 is for discussing the ideas behind the move c7, give an overview of the main replies and mention any key lines or openings that may be reached from that position with a link to refer to the pages where those lines and openings are discussed in detail. So, then the page /1._h3/1...c7/1...h12 is for discussing the main ideas behind h12 and the main replies and similarly /1._h3/1...c7/1...h12/1...l9 is dedicated to the position after the move 1...l9 etc.

On the page for c7 (/1._h3/1...c7) you can then mention how c7 may lead to, e.g. the Icystun-Rezacz Defence later on and link to the page /1._h3/1...c7/1...h12/1...l10, where the Icystun-Rezacz Defence is then described in more detail.

Just replace the tright by tleft (first line after the title). To create a new page, you simply create the link and it will show up red in the text, saying the page doesn't exist. Then you click the link to create the page.

Yeah, what I did so far is just name the openings using a combination of regular chess opening names. And if teammates open the same way, I called it "Classical" and otherwise "Modern". For example, I called 1. h3 d6 h12 Nl9 the "Modern Sicilian, Nimzowitsch Variation". So, if you want to follow that system, then Nl9 would indeed be a Nimzowitsch Variation.

Perhaps we can use that as a sort of "official" naming system and in addition to that mention that the opening is "also commonly known as" e.g. Valger's Defence.

Nice,   good job!

Please feel free to use my ' WTA strategy guide'  as if it was your own and add it to the wikibook,  modify the wording,   etc.

I also have piece of constructive crticism:  I looked at the book and the pages were  looking super nice,    but I found they lacked a lot of hyperlinks.   for instance,  on the main 4PC page, you have a section about FFA and a section about Teams variant.  But both arent hyperlinked.  It would be important to have as many hyperlinks as possible in order to facilitate navigation through the book. 

@Bill13Cooper Everyone can contribute, so if you want to add your WTA strategy guide, feel free to do so.

Regarding the links, do you mean the strategy page? There is a table of contents on each page linking to all the sections. I'm not sure what you mean.

What do you mean? The diagram is right next to it. Nothing was removed.

Ah, yes, that's the only diagram you added. See the history:

https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Four-Player_Chess/Common_openings/1._h3/1...d6&oldid=3504436

How do you create a game in four player chess? I want to create a blind box with fairy peices can any one of you explain please

I made something similar although I won't tell you what it is because If I do that, I may get Chat-banned for spamming!

A really good start.  Of course, now with the setup changing and point allocation, some things must change.  

Here's a question I'd like some experts to weigh in, it falls into endgame theory but it's a curious thing about 4PC 1v1 games that is distinctly different from chess, arising from the fact that pawn promotion happens in the middle of the board.

I refer to the K and Q versus K, N and two connected P's game, assuming pawns are not in position to immediately promote but the KNPP player's pieces are sensibly arranged initially for protection.

I've experienced this ending a few times, mostly as KNPP against higher-rated players ~2400.  My 1v1 endgame is relatively strong, so the 3-400 point gap is probably not a clear measure of differential.

But I've been surprised how many times I win this game.  The stronger player appears to judge that a Q is sufficient to stop the Ps.  It seems clear to me that the KQ player can force a draw by repeated check.  But players with a rating advantage appear to want to play for the mate, and about 2/3 of the time end up (I think carelessly) giving me too many free tempos to advance.  They cannot mate without K moves, and even with a K in front of my pawns remarkably often they are unsuccessful.  I think I may have lost this game once, and again it's not clear to me whether because of a fatal blunder. 

I can't find any treatment of "common" endgame arrangements, particularly for 1v1.  But there are a few that appear often enough you'd think there'd be a definitive theory one could read.

Maybe an expert would like to pull that together for the Wiki?

Other topics that would be dandy to see written up in a Wiki:

1.  Tactical use of zombie deadwood and dead kings walking in middle and endgame play.  I've developed a number of rules of thumb.  For example most players by the time they hit 2000 have figured out that a mated player leaving a diagonal chain of deadwood crossing one of your pawns' paths is an opportunity for shelter or multiple pathways. It's approximately equal to having rook support, but "for free".   Also a forest of deadwood is pretty estimable protection if an unprotected K has a chance to make a run-for-it.To Quote Gimli in LOTR: 

"Very handy in a tight spot, these lads, despite the fact they're dead."

2.  Solo King checkmates.  That is, a King having no other pieces executes a mate.  I played one classic such game in which the player holding only a K goes from 4th to 1st on the last move of the game.  For anyone who doesn't believe this is possible, feast your eyes ...

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=8265261-418

This and other like rarities and anomalies of the 4-player game deserve special treatment.

3.  Many high-rated players have low classical chess ratings, I've noticed.  It generally shows when you face them 1v1 in an endgame.  Often I'm shocked that the player who seemed to undefeatable with other players in the game doesn't know how to protect "backwards pawns" and cannot make their middle-rank officers like B or N pairs work together properly.  

So there may be a call for someone writing of the peculiarities of the key skills for 4PC that set the game apart from Chess.

Simultaneously I think there is a need for a simply-written manual showing basic chess survival skills for the players who've mastered the social and combination tactics of the multi-player game but are all thumbs in 1v1.  Things any decent standard chess player knows.  If you have these rules of thumb stored in your brain then it really simplifies play with only 5 or 6 pieces on the board.  EG if your opponent has 1 B and some other piece, keep your K off the colour of the B also to a lesser extent any other pieces you hope to retain.  If it cannot be used to check and/or attack your vulnerable pieces it becomes far less useful than on a populated board!  When being harassed by your opponent's N  (or Ns) and seeking relief, look to stay on the opposite colour square as the N.  Again, you are then beyond check.  Or if you must go on that square, go for the same diagonal, leaving 1 (or 3) squares between your K and their N.  The N must then move at least 3 times to check.  Your K's best position if the opponent is making pawn runs and you're short on firepower is in front of those pawns. A K can, in the right position, prevent 3 connected Ps from advancing.  Keep in mind when wandering into connected pawn chains, however, that the K is much more vulnerable to mate by sniping  enemy officers.  Isolated pawns on opposite sides of the board are less vulnerable than you think, if both are within a couple of moves of promoting and your opponent has only one officer.  I try to protect one with the K and use the other to make threats that win you a tempo or two.  To stop an opponent doing this it is best to have your K in front of one of his Ps. Etc.