Where in Seirawan chess is it said that BN or RN are dropped on e5?
Moreover, I wonder how many variants are robust to crazy house play?
Gothic Chess
Sort:
jean-louiscazaux wrote:
Where in Seirawan chess is it said that BN or RN are dropped on e5?
Moreover, I wonder how many variants are robust to crazy house play?
In Seirawan, a piece drop takes the place of a move.
In Seirawan Crazyhouse, or SHouse for short, the game above is perfectly valid. It was played by the Gothic inventor against Stockfish Level 1 on the PyChess site.
Komstratyx-Spiele wrote:
I think the problem with the excessive opening theory will be on an 8*8 board in every game in the long run.
Want to play some Janus?
We can play a game Gothic Chess or Bollwerk 178.
Ok. but I'm not too good at Gothic. Your move.
My name is Steven Friedman. But I posted your comments in Ed's Discord channel, which is free for anyone to observe. When he replied, he asked me to post the comments here. So I did. The end.
lol! joined 1 day ago.
Dec 1, 2020
0
#69
musketeerchess2017 wrote:
what i most like is the best najdorf games.
My 61 memorable games by Bobby Fischer. E.T caught at the US Open trying to sell his self made scam book.
https://www.avlerchess.com/chess-misc/I_met_the_Great_Ed_Trice_299279.html
61?
jean-louiscazaux wrote:
ArchbishopCheckmate a écrit :
On a 9x9 board, Bishops never fight. The two on white's side are the opposite of black's side. So there's no point.
Really? No point. No, bad point for you, it's just the opposite. On a 9x9 board, the 4 Bishops do fight.
I don't defend the 9x9 or anything kind of board.
It's crazy. Most of chessvariant enthusiasts are complaining that many chess lovers are narrow-mind when they want to ban chessvariants. But among chessvariants fans, some want to ban large boards, or some type of variants. This is not a different attitude. In fact some people are living thinking they have invented the new game that will surpass chess and they keep fighting against other inventors that they see as competitors. This is quite naive. I would say sad. Others, and I belong to that category, like chess variants for the fun they found in them, for the variety of situations they offer. I like big boards, 10x10, 12x12, even more. I like small ones too. I like new pieces, I appreciate the analysis some like HG can do from that. I have pleasure with that. What is the problem? I don't force anyone to like what I like.
I think it is strange that chess players, and not least good players, show an interest in advanced forms of chess. I'll tell you they'll be sharpened. But as we already know, people prefer the light and comfortable, without having to make more effort than necessary. Chess players in a nutshell.
lol
@MusketeerChess & @ArchbishopCheckMate - Please guys, stop this mud fight. You have both made your point, and elaborating on it just isn't very interesting for the readers, and in particular doesn't do much for promoting chess variants.
Both Gothic Chess and Musketeer Chess are interesting variants, and their inventors have done the variant-chess community a great service by making sets with fairy pieces and boards of unusual size commercially available. All of our achievements are only possible because "we are standing on the shoulders of giants".
Some ideas pop up several times during history; 10x8 Chess with Archbishop and Chancellor was first invented by Pietro Carrera in the 17th century, and later independently by Henry Bird and Capablanca, all with different setups. Gothic Chess is a very good variant in the same tradition.
Likewise, Musketeer Chess had Pioneer Chess as a precursor that used the same method for introducing (one or two) extra pieces, and only differs by using it for a set of pieces that is somewhat different. (Even though they do have pieces in common: the Mastodon metioned on the Pioneer-Chess page occurs in Musketeer Chess under the name Elephant.)
So much has been tried already, that almost everything one invents will be close to something that existed before. Should we have that spoil the fun of trying new things? I don't think so!
Yes, disputes are sad. Without any offense to anyone I would like to understand:
* if yes or no it is allowed at Seirawan Chess to drop a RN or a BN on e5. My understanding is those pieces can only be dropped on a vacated square on the back line. True or not?
* why saying that on a 9x9 board the Bishops never fight. In my opinion, on a 9x9 board all 4 Bishops do fight.
If people are saying wrong things because they are getting on nerves, they should cool down and recognise they have said a mistake. Or kindly explain. That would be appreciated.
With a symmetric setup all Bishops would indeed start on the same shade on 9x9. On 9x8 the Bishops would start on opposite shade as the enemy Bishops. In Symmetric Chess this was solved by forcing one of the Bishops to relocate to a different color on its first move.
In Seirawan Chess pieces are gated (rather than dropped) on the back rank only, as a side effect of a development move rather than as an independent move.
I'll voluntarily remove my antagonistic posts.
Yes, let's hope everyone does that.
...
I was originally Archenemy on jocly then I forgot my password. Mig didn't have the reset password working back then so I made a new account ArchNemesis, yes. Why what was your name?
I think the problem with the excessive opening theory will be on an 8*8 board in every game in the long run.