I don't know what's funnier, the actual funny comments like the first post, or the posts from people thinking that it's serious.
Actually I do know. It's the post when some guy takes it seriously and then backtracks and tries to say he was being sarcastic before, in a prolonged or sarcastic manner. I don't know who he thought he was fooling, but I'm glad he tried. Hilarious!
The black should be allowed the 2 moves simultaneously during the game whenever the white allows or agrees. Isnt that the great equaliger.?
White should have to down a shot of Whiskey after every move he takes.
Good God! I'd never play black agaiin!
Or win...
how about if we punch each other until someone cries, then that person moves first?
"how about if we punch each other until someone cries, then that person moves first?"
Better yet, every time someone tries to take a piece, both players get up and fight, and the loser loses his piece. (Yes this means if you "checkmate" someone but they beat you in a fight you lose the attacking piece.)
Naturally, there is a bonus for being the attacking player and for higher piece value: For example, if a pawn were to try to take another pawn, one player would have a large stick and the other wouldn't. If a knight tried to take a pawn he would have a sword. Due to the possibility of injury to players, players would be allowed to assemble teams of "pieces" to do the fighting for them.
Not only would this remove the advantage due to white's moving first, it would make chess a more team-oriented sport, AND it would boost the mainstream public's interest immensely. I could visualize this sort of thing making it onto TV...
"how about if we punch each other until someone cries, then that person moves first?"
Better yet, every time someone tries to take a piece, both players get up and fight, and the loser loses his piece. (Yes this means if you "checkmate" someone but they beat you in a fight you lose the attacking piece.)
Naturally, there is a bonus for being the attacking player and for higher piece value: For example, if a pawn were to try to take another pawn, one player would have a large stick and the other wouldn't. If a knight tried to take a pawn he would have a sword. Due to the possibility of injury to players, players would be allowed to assemble teams of "pieces" to do the fighting for them.
Not only would this remove the advantage due to white's moving first, it would make chess a more team-oriented sport, AND it would boost the mainstream public's interest immensely. I could visualize this sort of thing making it onto TV...
I would totally watch that. Gladiator chess!! Brain and braun!! Only on Spike TV
I've been thinking about this for awhile now, the best and fairest way is before playing a game of chess you must first
Play 51 games of chess, the person who wins the most games can choose white or black,
Your ideas are completely idiotic.
I think black should start with an extra pawn on b7
or better yet chess boxing!
http://wcbo.org/content/index_en.html
my solution:
every peice moves like it should, but attacks in the opposite diection. rooks with bishops, queens with knights.
bishops move diagonally, but must attack forward or sideways (like a rook)
rooks move sideways and forward, but must attack diagonally (like bishops)
knights move like knights, but must attack like queens
queens move like queens, but must attack like knights
pawns are special. they can move forward/backward/sideways 1 square. they attack 1 square diagonally.
like real chess, special rules apply. ex. en passant or pawns moving 2 spaces 1st move (even sideways!)
and there is one special rule, you can attack your own peices if you want (to get out of checkmate)
every peice moves like it should, but attacks in the opposite diection. rooks with bishops, queens with knights.
bishops move diagonally, but must attack forward or sideways (like a rook)
rooks move sideways and forward, but must attack diagonally (like bishops)
knights move like knights, but must attack like queens
queens move like queens, but must attack like knights
pawns are special. they can move forward/backward/sideways 1 square. they attack 1 square diagonally.
like real chess, special rules apply. ex. en passant or pawns moving 2 spaces 1st move (even sideways!)
and there is one special rule, you can attack your own peices if you want (to get out of checkmate)
An intriguing solution. Remind me: what was the problem?
Well i dont think chess game is unfair, both players get to play with white (first move for white isnt big advantage, it only makes black harder to make attacking development, there is always a defense, and counter attacks.)
This is silly. Obviusly white has more wins than black, but that's the reason why in a tournament a player plays an equal number of games with each colour, but the difference of 1 game in most tournaments (except here=P). That's also why there is a rule when there's a draw between two players winning the tournament, that they play a game, and the one who has white plays with 5 minutes and is forced to win, otherwise he/she loses, and the black plays with 6 minutes.
dam game chess, you would have thought they would have ironed all this out by now, i mean the game has been around for ages,
Maybe Black should be allowed to ask advice from the player next him.
why bother to comment on this post?
why bother to comment on this post?
you did, weird huh
Here's an idea, have each player jot thier moves down on a scrap of paper and give them to a neutral arbiter who then moves both sides simultaneously! ;)
Although I do like the idea of permitting Black to make one last move to attempt to checkmate white for a draw...that actually seems kind fair...
cows win 57 out of 100 when facing chickens, but only 48 out of 100 when facing pigs, can someone please help me rectify this barnyard dilemma?
rooperi wrote: I think every time it's the chiken's turn to move it wants to cross the road.
... to consult the chess-engine on the other side?