Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 04:18:09 07/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2005 at 06:31:07, F. Huber wrote: >4)"Chess960 finally is not compatible to traditional Chess": >Again absolutely correct! Chess960 is a superset of classical chess, and the >big majority (942/960) of the starting positions are definitely _contradicting_ >the classical chess rules (with regard to castling)! >Would you call this ´compatible´?? (If ´yes´, you´ll certainly be the only one) >Franz. Hi Franz Both naming schemes have some flaws. I do consider FRC/Chess960 to be a true superset of traditional chess, the rules are naturally extended (IMHO) to positions where rooks are initially located elsewhere. This is possible because in FRC there is a restriction; There must be a rook on each side of the king. This restriction is what makes a natural extension possible. It's so simple IMO, that if you ask anyone that doesn't know the rules to FRC to extend the traditional chess rules to these cases, then they will end up inventing the exact FRC rules themselves. While I agree that the Shredder FEN is more natural and easy to implement, I also have to agree with Reinhard that it's unfortunate to have two naming conventions for the traditional opening. One may fear that this will cause FRC to be seen as a variant of chess instead of a superset. -S.
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.