Author: andrew tanner
Date: 18:10:58 11/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 2002 at 20:51:21, Bob Durrett wrote: >On November 13, 2002 at 20:44:16, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>I was reading my Chess Life magazine today, and in it, GM Larry Evans was >>answering a question about whether or not chess has become "stagnant". He talked >>about Capablanca warning about this long ago, when he (Capablanca) suggested >>that they increase the board size and add an extra piece. He also mentioned >>Fischer Random chess, which allows 960 different opening positions. He said that >>chess masters are now going into each game now with essentially the same >>information, and that what sets players above other players is usually opening >>lines that are prepared for a specific oponent, and if that subtle trick doesn't >>work out, bring on the draw. >> >>I was thinking about this, and I wondered what an idea borrowed from the game of >>Hex might do to chess. In Hex (http://home.earthlink.net/~vanshel/) there is a >>"swap rule". You can click on "What is Hex" on the aforementioned website to >>read about the swap rule in Hex. >> >>Basically it is an attempt to remove white's first move advantage. How it would >>work in chess is that (for example) white plays 1. e4, and then black may either >>play a move as normal, or black may choose to switch sides and play as white >>from the position after 1. e4. >> >>I think this poses some potentially very interesting situations and could >>prolong the life of chess in the future. For example, if 100 years from now >>chess is solved and there is found a forced win for white from (say) 1. d4, then >>everyone will play 1. d4 as white, and attempt to force the win. Eventually the >>technique would be worked out and a strong master would always be able to win as >>white, and chess would cease to be enjoyable. If a swap rule were implemented, a >>player may still play 1. d4 and go for the forced win, but it would be a gamble >>because his opponent could take over as white. It would also encourage the study >>of more suspect openings, since finding a good line in an opening with a poor >>reputation would be very powerful in such a system. >> >>Any thoughts? >> >>Russell > >Could the swapping be done on the second move? The third? The 50th? > >If swaps could be done at any point in the opening phase of the game, all >openings would end in equality. Otherwise, one's opponent might get the >advantage by a swap. > >There could even be an element of deception. If a player suspected that the >opponent was going to swap, a bad move might be made just to give a bad position >to the other guy after the anticipated swap. > >Somehow, I don't think this chess variant will catch on. But you might suggest >it as another type of Wild chess at ICC and see if they offer it. If so, it's >popularity could be tested. > >I wouldn't start writing a chess engine program to do that yet, however. : ) > > >Bob D. I thought about a variant of chess where the queen would be replaced by another king, and both kings could castle opposite sides of the board. So basically there would be 4 kings on the board and both kings would have to be checkmated to win. The game would probably gain great popularity in San Francisco and Provincetown.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.