'Psychologic' - amazing chess variant

So checkmate is a VERY rare result, and the game is thus probably very long, as you only have one legal move is not very likely.

Am I correct, or is there a strategy to reduce the opponent's choices? 

And if the position has plenty of choices,  resignation becomes very unlikely.

No , the game is not too long. I don't think it is longer than an average chess game.

Resignation decision rather  depends not on the number of choices in a position, but on a position evaluation.

It's true that there should be two checkmates available to checkmate but the condition of winning in case of opponent having single move more than makes up for that.

Anyway I'd like to try a game but I'm not that strong in general.

Good then let's play

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess960-chess-variants/psychologic-annchess2---evertvb

Different pawn promotions count as different moves?

In refusal chess it does.

I thought this variant was called 'Veto Chess'.

It strikes me sa illogical that after Qxf7 you would be considered checkmated. It doesn't seem you are even in check, because you can veto the Queen move that would capture the King. So it seems there is an extra rule here that you cannot veto King captures.

It also seems illogical that not having a second move would always make you lose. If you are not in check, not having a legal move is usually stalemate.

I thought this variant was called 'Protest Chess'.

If you have ever played Chess then you have wished that either you or your opponent did not make a certain move. The ability to take back a move in Chess is usually limited to handicap games and even then the number of "take-backs" is limited. Protest Chess gives each person the "right" to protest each move.  While you may think that this "protest" feature will make for "easier" games, be warned .......

Protest Chess will "tax" your chess skills and create new thinking patterns.

Rules of Protest Chess (PC) by Franz Patocka and Guenter Haika

1. The general FIDE rules of chess apply.

Note: Impossible or disallowed move such as castling across a square controlled by the opponent remain impossible or disallowed in PC.. We do play Protest CHESS after all, not Protest Monte.

2. After each move the opponent may ("may", not "must"!) protest once against the transmitted move.

Note: This means ONE option to protest PER MOVE.

Note 2: When promoting a pawn, the opponent may either protest the move itself, which

means the pawn cannot be promoted in the alternate move, or against the piece chosen for promotion, which means the pawn must promote, but an alternate promotion piece must be chosen.

3. Notation of a protest should be as such: The vetoed move is to be repeated in [square parentheses] and marked by a capitalized "P".

Example: Transmitted move: 1.e4 Protesting reply: 1.[e4 P] Action to be taken by White: Go study another opening!

4. No protest can be filed against a protest.

Note: If after the opponent's protest one is left without legal alternate moves, the game is lost. Tough luck, pal!

Example: The white Queen captures the pawn h7, checking the Kh8. Black plays KxQh7. White replies [KxQh7 P]. If now Black has no other option to remove the white Queen, he is left without a move and thus mated.

5. As soon as a player transmits a move in reply to an original move of the opponent, the right to protest against the opponents original move is forfeited.

Note: But of course the player has the right to protest the next move, and also the right to forfeit the right to protest again for the next move..

6. Transmitting optional continuations is prohibited.

Note: But of course. It's no fun if a player receives a twenty page analysis with all the possible protests / non-protests / alternates .. blablabla.

Hmm. Aside from 960, this is probably the chess variant I'd be most willing to play. Very interesting

The normal version, or my double-move version?

I haven't thought through the double move version yet so I'm ready to hear why it would or wouldn't work.

@vickalan The strategy is quite different from classic chess! It is not about the best or second best move. It is about creating a situation in which one has a very dangerous move (for example, a direct matte threat), and therefore can make another, very unpleasant move which can not be rejected. I already have some experience with this variation and it is a very dialectical and complex game, chess in square. An extra complication with a double-move version I consider unnecessary.

That makes the game interesting as I can put a piece en-prise if there's only one way for you to capture it as I can reject such a move.

I was curious how a computer would play in this variant. Obviously that would take a little more work than normal because if you reject a move, you have to find the computer's next best move. And the computer decides to accept or reject your moves by checking if you played the best move or not (as rated by chess, not this variant).

So I analyzed the game (for a few moves) recently played by AnnChess2 and  EvertVB  and this is what I found: