George Duke wrote on Tue, Oct 7, 2008 11:24 PM UTC:
Okay, we are getting wonderfully healthful differentiation of topics for
once, sharpening critical thinking. World Championship 8x8. Is 8x8 small? Yes, awkwardly small. Think of
the divergence from the common ancestor the 1-2 millenniums back. Xiangqi
enlarged the board from Asian peninsular Chaturanga. Shogi enlarged the
board. Travelling west, Shatranj stayed the same with small 8x8, and
OrthoChess followed suit during its lifetime years 1500-2000 keeping small
8x8. Computers appeared in 18th century minds like Wolfgang von Kempelen's
in development of automaton the Turk -- the idea of machine playing Chess,
the quintessential human endeavor. Computer theory began in 19th century
with Babbage's Universal Analytical Engine. By early 21st century, selected
Computers (TogaII, Rybka) are de facto world champion on small 8x8. Still smaller 6x6 Los
Alamos had been mastered earlier. So, board size must be important factor
trying keeping computer at bay. Human championships being ballyhooed of
computer-mastered OrthoChess 8x8, like this month's Anand-Kramnik at
Bonn, will inevitably progressively receive diminishing stature,
eventually of no especial note. High time for reform, revolution, or
revelation: mere contemplative revelation that small 8x8 never really was
suitable for any complete Chess anyway. Although OrthoChess will not quite go
the way of Checkers, or lowly Tic-Tac-Toe, let us ease its passage from
paramount contest of skill and challenge to cultural artifact and relic -- gone the
way of Shatranj, fondly remembered and oh-so passe.
