Author: Peter Berger
Date: 10:09:08 05/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2003 at 19:58:22, Landon Rabern wrote: >As far as Shuffle vs. FRC, for some reason I find FRC more aesthetically >pleasing, that's all. Yes, a matter of taste. I really do not see how someone can say that Reinhard is >arguing his position religously when in actuality it is the other side(why are >there sides in this?) that has some sort of agenda. Why make arguments against >FRC when someone who is not even arguing in favor of it just mentions it? To say that Reinhard just _mentions_ FRC is _really_ a stretch :). Personally I have no problems with FRC at all, to each his own. What I disagree to is that it is so different to Shuffle Chess variants when the only major difference are castling rules. And I also don't think that it adds a complete new dimension to the game. I have tried to support this with data in another post. > The >only reason I can see is because of personal distaste for Fischer. Bad reason. > The only thing I dislike somewhat are the praised castling rules, but this is just a matter of taste as you mentioned. I definitely have no problems with the fact that it was invented by Fischer :) Peter
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.