Dchrch, there are 960 combinations. That's why it's called 960 chess.
Bring Back Free Castling!
Sort:
Sep 24, 2012
0
#23
I want to be a hippie.
Woodstock is still in me. Let my hair down. Ride my hippie bike all over town.
But most of all castling must be free. Along with the animals of the earth, the tigers and cows and lions castling too must meet the sunshine and drop its chains as it is..
freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! 
Sep 24, 2012
0
#24
Being a hippie is a state of mind. Your consumption of capitalistic mass-marketed and regally named slabs of bovine consumer product in no way precludes your hippieness.
Sep 24, 2012
0
#25
dchurchill wrote:
You can still make opening theory for fischer random anyway. If it were more popular there would probably end up being popular openings for each setup. What are there, 64 different combinations? I'm sure you could make up 64 openings for each color. Actually 63 since you would already have openings for the normal setup. Do you ever get the traditional setup when you play fischer random?
Yes I know that you can have opening theory in Fischer random in fact you can have opening theory in all chess variants. What I'm getting at is that in free-castling-chess you can bypass the endless reams of standard modern chess theory without having to resort to such radical methods like Fischer random and other such variants to escape theory. This is one reason why Fischer came up with random chess to begin with. Free-castling-chess still maintains the character of standard/traditional chess without such extreme alterations to the rules of the game.
Terminology police here. Where we're you when we couldn't figure out what a book was?
Sep 24, 2012
0
#27
Tin-Cup wrote:
There's a really interesting article on chesscafe.com titled Bring Back Free Castling! in the archives section for The Kibitzer column which is written by Tim Harding that argues that modern castling rules should be changed back to the old "free castling" rules. Free castling means that when one castles, the king & the rook can end up on various squares, e.g. the rook on e1 and the king on h1 for White in kingside castling, or the king could go to a1 (or b1, c1 etc, etc) & the Rook could go to e1 (or d1 or b1 etc) for queenside castling. Basically put, as long as the White king (for example) moves to the right of the rook for kingside castling, or to the left of the rook for queenside castling & the king and rook do not pass beyond their respective squares (e1 and h1 & e1 and a1) during this maneuver the move would be considered legal and playable. All other castling rules would still apply e.g. not castling through, into or out of a check and so forth. Once you read the article you'll get a better idea of this very interesting rule. Harding argues that this rule would make chess even more interesting and would add more dynamism & strategy without radically altering the character of the game or board like so many chess variants do. (bughouse chess, progressive chess, 3-D chess, loser's/suicide/giveaway chess, Fischer random/chess360 etc) And just to reiterate, free castling was the standard way of castling before the modern rules were introduced & the old Italian rules were let go, so changing the rules is not as radical as some would think. Check out the article and post your thoughts!
Yes, this is a great idea!! Chess engines wouldn't like this at all!
Sep 24, 2012
0
#28
-kenpo- wrote:
linuxblue1 wrote:
Being a hippie is a state of mind. Your consumption of capitalistic mass-marketed and regally named slabs of bovine consumer product in no way precludes your hippieness.
well isn't that some yuppie bs. absolutely ridiculous.
the term hippies refers to a specific group of people within american society during the 1960s. it refers to nothing and no one else.
don't hijack historical terms and use them inappropriately. create a new term for whatever the hell it is your talking about.
*********
Hey dude! You can't call me a 'yuppie'. You can't use that term. It ain't right to. If you keep saying 'yuppie' I'll tell the Kernel. 'Yuppie' is exclusively owned by young, driven businessmen who carry around mobile phones that are the size of bricks. What...these phones are smaller now? Huh?
Sep 24, 2012
0
#30
Haiku575 wrote:
Yes, this is a great idea!! Chess engines wouldn't like this at all!
Yes! this was one of the reasons Harding used to resurrect this rule & here's an example of a game with free castling from the article!
I certainly do not advocate Passar Battaglia but I would seriously
suggest that Free Castling is a reform that would be well worth
adopting to reduce the impact of theory and computers on the game
as it is played now. This would send publishers in a scurry to find
books of old Italian games as 99.9% of current opening theory
would immediately become redundant.
I certainly do not advocate Passar Battaglia but I would seriously
suggest that Free Castling is a reform that would be well worth
adopting to reduce the impact of theory and computers on the game
as it is played now. This would send publishers in a scurry to find
books of old Italian games as 99.9% of current opening theory
would immediately become redundant.
Here is an example, found in one of Professor Pagni books.
Warning - you won't be able to play this game into your database
program so get out a proper chess set to look at it! Played by
correspondence between the clubs of two Italian cities in 1877, it
was (he remarks) a good example of the level of play in Italy in
that period".
White: Ferrara Black: Modena
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d3 d6 6 Qe2 h6 7 Be3
Bb6 8 Nbd2 Kg8-Re8
Until this point it was a "normal" game, but now Black makes use
of Free Castling to get his rook to the central file. The players of
Modena could have put their king on h8 but maybe thought it was
safer on g8. Incidentally, Modena is the home town of the famous
tenor Pavarotti and if you travel by train from Milan to Bologna (or
onward to Florence and Rome) you will probably stop there. The
Italian Rules seem to have been particularly popular there.
9 h3 Ne7 10 g4 Bxe3 11 Qxe3 Ng6 12 g5 Nf4 [DIAGRAM?]
13 Ka1?-Rd1!
Free Castling again. The rook does not go to e1 because of the
threatened knight fork on g2, but I add the question mark because
the king would have been better placed on b1 (see move 26). In
"normal chess" of course, the king would go to c1. Now the game
proceeds "normally" for a while...
13...hxg5 14 Nxg5 Be6 15 Bxe6 Nxe6 16 Nxe6 Rxe6 17 Rdg1
Nh5 18 Nf1 Qf6 19 Ng3 Nxg3 20 Rxg3 Qf4 21 Rhg1 g6 22 Qxf4
exf4 23 Rf3 Rd8! 24 Rxf4 d5 25 exd5 Rxd5 26 d4 Rg5!
A back rank trick - if 27 Rxg1 Rd1 mate. See my note to White's
13th move!
27 Rf1 Kg7 28 a3 Rg2 29 d5 Rf6 30 Rb4 b6 31 Rc4 c5!
This move was only playable because of the "Passar Battaglia"
rule; in ortho-chess White would now win by 32 dxc6 en passant.
32 b4 cxb4 33 axb4 Rfxf2 34 Rxf2 Rxf2 35 Rd4 Kf8 36 c4 Ke7 37
Kb1 Rf3 38 Kc2?
According to contemporary sources, 38 c5 would have led to a
draw. Even later White might have been able to salvage a draw but
the game ended
38...Rxh3 39 c5 Rd7 40 d6 Rh8 41 Kc3? Kc6 42 Kc4 bxc5 43 b5+
Kb6 44 Re4 Rh1 45 Re3 Rd1 46 Rd3 Rxd3 47 Kxd3 Kb7 and
White resigned.
Sep 25, 2012
0
#31
Not really, the notation is the exactly the same except that when you castle instead of 0-0 or 0-0-0, you write what squares your king & rook are moving to. Like in the game above in post #39 this is how it was notated 13 Ka1?-Rd1! What's also interesting is the king move got a ? and the Rook move got a ! Two different signs for 1 move!!
Tin-Cup wrote:
Not really, the notation is the exactly the same except that when you castle instead of 0-0 or 0-0-0, you write what squares your king & rook are moving to. Like in the game above in post #39 this is how it was notated 13 Ka1?-Rd1! Whats also interesting is the king move got a ? and the Rook move got a ! Two different signs for 1 move!!
I still insist that we can use the standard 0-0 notation in a smart way.
0> = Kh1-Rg1
0-0> = Kg1-Rf1
0-0-0> = Kf1-Re1
<0 = Ka1-Rb1
<0-0 = Kb1-Rc1
<0-0-0 = Kc1-Rd1
<0-0-0-0 = Kd1-Re1
The count of "0"s indicate the number of squares that the rook moves.
Sep 25, 2012
0
#35
Interesting what about the king though? How would you notate Ka1-Re1 or Kb1-Re1?
Is that also possible? Wow, that's confusing.
Sep 25, 2012
0
#37
Oh yes! what I said is very possible and also many other permutations! e.g. ka1-rb1, ka1-rc1, ka1-rd1, ka1-re1 just to name a few, and this is only with the king on a1!! That's what makes free castling so incredibly dynamic! I can't for the life of me figure out why the free castling rules were dropped for the much less dynamic modern castling rules??
Sep 25, 2012
0
#38
From my calculations there's 16 different free castling positions to choose from! 10 for the queenside, 6 for the kingside. Someone correct me if I'm off.
Sep 25, 2012
0
#39
As I originally stated in post #1, all rules regarding castling still apply e.g. you can't castle out of check, into a check, or through a check, you can only castle on the king and rook's first move etc etc.
Kind of misses the point and spirit of FischerRandom, though, don't you think?