What is chess?

Some people think that chess is equal to Fide-chess. But Fide-chess is merely one among many chess variants, the most popular being Xiangqi (Chinese Chess) and the most profitable being Shogi (Japanese Chess) and the most popular among amateur players is Makruk (Thai Chess), which is played everywhere on the streets in Thailand.

Of course, there are several more, like Changqi (Korean Chess). In the historical perspective, an important variant is Shatranj Kamil , invented by Timur Lenk. It is a slow, strategical big board variant, still played on the chessvariants server. There exist many interesting historical variants, such as this variant, invented by King Gustav III of Sweden (1746-92). The Circular Chess world championship is played every year at Lincoln castle. It is a revived medieval variant.

So it is high time to abandon the notion that Western chess is the "only" chess variant. It is definitely not what most people on the earth refer to as "chess". The most popular game in the world, far surpassing everything else, is Chinese Chess. There must be a reason for its popularity. Former women World Champion Xie Jun says that she prefers it before Fide-chess. It is more fun and not at all as tedious.

I want to point this out to make clear that chess is not Fide-chess, it is variant chess.

Mats

To be honest I never really understood how xiangqi or Chinese chess could be so popular, I mean half of your pieces can't even cross the middle of the board (the river).  You say it's not as tedious as western chess, I say it's not as interesting :)

Chinese chess lacks the strategical variance of Fide-chess, but it is much more tactical. Players must always construct traps and watch out for tactics. Counterattack is clearly better than defense. Mating the king is always the objective, and few games are drawn. It is quite entertaining but not as deep, I think.

Mats

I followed your link to Xiangqi -- how much do you know about the game?  Some of what the page said was confusing.  It said Xiangqi is more technical than western chess but at the same time less tedious (I think of those as being the same thing).  It also said endgames in Xiangqi have been studied even more deeply than in western chess... I'm wondering how that's even really possible to gauge.

But the guy also says "Unlike Western Chess, having an extra piece is not as important as having a strong attack" which seems to imply that in western chess having an extra piece is more important than having a strong attack (which isn't true) so I'm wondering how much the guy knows about each game to begin with.  Maybe he's not communicating what he means well?  Does he mean in western chess you usually have to maneuver some before you can start an attack while in xiangqi you can attack immediately?

Ooh, I see.  I've only played the game 4-5 times, so I don't know very much about it :)

Gustav's chess variant seems interesting..

In Fide-chess it's sufficient to gain a pawn to have a won game, in the general case. Chinese Chess, however, revolves around the initiative. The values of the pieces are more relative. Fide-chess can sometimes be extremely tedious. This never happens in Chinese Chess, which is a game of continuous action. Chinese Chess endgame theory is enormous. This is due to the fact that it is very rewarding to study endgames, because it is still about tactics and finesses, and giving mate. In Fide-chess, it is not necessary to study endgames extensively because one can always find one's way at the board, by calculating variations (exceptions are some theoretical rook endgames that deserve study). 

Mats

Gustav III's Chess is great fun. It can be very brutal as one can often sacrifice two light pieces to create a breach for the Amazon. This powerful piece, invented in medieval times, can easily create mate situations in the middlegame. The gustavian board has another interesting aspect. The king can hide in the extra corner and the pawns on the same wing can advance without compromising the king. Especially, if the Amazons are exchanged and the game reverts to standard chess, this stratagem becomes even more important.

Mats

I think there are some misconceptions, it would be interesting to hear from a player who is very good at both games.  But from your post I can understand now that perhaps the primary advantage you can have in chinese chess is initiative while in western chess the primary advantage is material.

You may not know that in fide-chess a player often gives up a pawn (or more) for other advantages, even in the opening.  Comments like being a pawn up is often enough to win really aren't true.

It seems the two games endgames are very differnt, so it's hard for me to understand at first how chinese-chess has a lot of theory.  In fide-chess endgames you usually have to play for a pawn promotion and it takes a lot of precise maneuvering usually with few available tactics.  From what you say chinese-chess endgames still have many mate, attacking, and tactical possibilities.  In western-chess endgame theory is about how to maneuver to convert a small advantage, I suppose in chinese-chess endgame theory is about attacks and mate?

One big misconception in your post is about fide-endgames.  The very reason you must study endgames in fide-chess is because you can't find your way over the board with pure calculation :)  In fact the endgame in fide-chess is the most strategic part where you must have understanding otherwise over the board you will be lost.  For most amateurs and all computers this is the weakest part of their game because it requires understanding.

Endgame theory in Fide-chess is simple: king opposition, triangulation, rook behind friendly pawn, etc. As soon as you have learnt these principles, and certain intricacies of pawn endgames, then you can rely on your own intellectual powers. Endgames in Fide-chess are mostly practical. Of course, one can study the technique of queen against rook, but it's no use since it will probably never occur.

A pawn up in Fide-chess is generally a win, if there is no compensation. In most cases, it's a matter of technique. In Chinese Chess a pawn up or down is less important, the attacking possibilities of the position take precedence. My ICC rating is 2155, so I am capable of sacrificing a pawn for dynamic or positional compensation. You can always study my games in your game database, some of them are quite good. I am not an idiot.

Mats

I certainly didn't think you were an idiot lol   I just didn't know how much you knew about fide-chess.

It's odd you say all you need to know in the endgame is opposition, triangulation, rook behind pawn, etc -- these are the very most simple things you learn at the lowest level, there is honestly more to learn.  Perhaps your 2155 rating is due to being very good at calculation and tactics, or your natural ability otherwise makes up for it in ways you don't realize.  I guess this must be true because you say yourself you just know the basics, and your ability carries you the rest of the way.

Botvinniks brain would probably explode if he where alive today and read how simplistic and easy endgames are.

Yes heh

It may be Laquear that you have a non-beginner rating of 2100, but even GMs don't describe the endgame as:  "not necessary to study . . . extensively because one can always find one's way at the board"

In fact nearly everyone says the opposite.  Now if you're a tactical player who wins his games in the middle game, or a natural who may play the end game well, that's fine.  But your description of the endgame is way off :)

If you look up chess in an encyclopedia I believe the description that you get is of what you like to call " fide-chess "  , so chess IS "fide-chess "  , its really as simple as that.

The unmarked term in English means the game to which this site is devoted; the unmarked term in Chinese is xiangqi and means the game we call Chinese chess in English. If they want to refer to this version, they call it guoji xiangqi (国际象棋) "international chess". You may as well say that the Chinese think xiangqi is the only version of chess and really oughtn't to.

I don't think anyone who's aware of related games does think that the kind of chess played here is the only kind, but generally there are no terminological issues. When a Dutch person meets a Spanish one, and they both talk about chess, they know exactly what they mean without needing to modify the noun unless they start talking about a different version of the game.

As for Chinese chess, I tried it long before I ever came to China and found it much less interesting than the more familiar game.

lol

Endgames can be very demanding, especially practical rook endgames. But you can work yourself through them. Opening studies are much more rewarding than endgame studies.

Mats