Author: Reinhard Scharnagl
Date: 08:23:13 06/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2004 at 11:05:10, Angrim wrote: >I think that having castling in randomized chess is silly, Why? >and if you leave it out then you can both make the rules simpler, Castlings are defined by very simple rules. You simply have to think of normal chess: the post-castling positions are always the same, the way of the pieces to perform the castling have to be free, a chess threat on the way is disabling a castling possibility. Everybody who can play the traditional chess is able to understand that nearly at once. >and also remove some of the restrictions on where the king/rooks go From which restrictions do you speak? If it is that the king has to be placed somewhere between the rooks, well, that is for to enable castlings. >which allows for a wider variety of starting positions. Why do you think, that 24000 different positions are not sufficiently wide? >Just my opinion of course, but I think that it should be removed. Well, but you have not mentioned really strong reasons for that. Nevertheless thank you for your opinion. >Angrim Regards, Reinhard.
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.