Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
I think I need to clarify some tthings so you can understand me better. Anything in italics like this is something you wrote. So, let me make some minor clarifications:
The color-bound pieces imbalance (e.g., queen and archbishop both on dark or light spaces)
'Colorbound', for me, has a very specific meaning. I use Betza's meaning for colorbound: A piece that, for the entire game, always has to be on the same color. A bishop. for example, that starts on the white squares will always be on the white squares for the entire game, since it can not make a move going from the white squares to the black squares. Netither the queen nor archbishop are colorbound; both pieces can reach any square on a blank board in two or three moves.
As an aside, I like your using 'what squares can the power pieces go were they the only pieces on the board' as an evaluation criteria for evaluating an opening setup.
you have a vast number of positions to choose from (12,000+ according to Reinhard Scharnagl)
Actually, we only have 72 positions to choose from (see the beginning of this thread again).
Edit: It looks like the beginning of this thread got eaten, so, again: I observed that all of the various Capablanca opening setups proposed over the centuries have the following three features:
- Symmetrical with the rooks, knights, and bishops.
- The rooks are either in the corners or one file away from the corners
- The king is always in a center file
An undefended pawn can, with perfect play by white (the player with the first-move-of-the-game advantage) over a number of moves irrefutably result in a stolen pawn despite perfect play by black
As I recall, the evidence for that assertion was very questionable. An undefended flank pawn will not result in a proven win for white. It might make the opening a little more tactical; for example, in Narcotic Chess (RQNBKMBNAR), black might be forced to develop his marshall side knight in order to defend his archbishop pawn.
Again, please do not take my postings personally, and thank you for your insights.
- Sam
'I only think color balance for pieces matter if the pieces are colorbound. It doesn't matter to me what colors non-colorbound pieces end up on since those pieces can change color at will.'
The color-bound pieces imbalance (e.g., queen and archbishop both on dark or light spaces) is measurably a much more efficacious fault than the color-changing pieces imbalance (e.g., chancellor and archbishop both of dark or light spaces) although I classified both as 'minor faults' in the overall scheme consisting of only 4 distinct faults.
As measured by the movement capabilities for each power piece taken one-at-a-time on an otherwise empty board at its opening position [an ideal, potential maximum evaluation to reveal space-based imbalances rather than an actual, obstructed condition existing upon the very first move of the game by white], a color-bound pieces imbalance often results in a number for one color that is appr. twice as high as the other color in CRC. For example, 39 dark spaces can be occupied while only 20 light spaces can be occupied on the first move. So, it is NOT merely a trivial fault (instead of a minor fault).
A color-changing pieces imbalance typically only throws the numbers (from a total of appr. 55-59) out of balance by 2-4 more than they would otherwise be since a perfect balance never exists anyway with any CRC positions. Still, when you have a vast number of positions to choose from (12,000+ according to Reinhard Scharnagl), why tolerate this imbalance, either. Logically, I cannot tolerate the former fault. So, I will not tolerate the latter fault of a similar nature, either. Thereby, I maintain consistent standards for the model.
_______________________________________________________
'... I no longer think it's essential that each and every pawn in the opening setup is defended. I think it's a good idea for white to be unable to threaten mate on his first move, since otherwise Black can be prevented from making natural developing moves in the opening; having all pawns defended stops these kinds of threats.'
Yes but ...
An undefended pawn can, with perfect play by white (the player with the first-move-of-the-game advantage) over a number of moves irrefutably result in a stolen pawn despite perfect play by black. [{proven to us by someone}* using a powerful, multi-CPU computer with one proposed CRC opening setup.] Ultimately, this material disadvantage is probable to lead to the eventual defeat of black. This is too unfair to black. The potential amplification of the pre-existing and marginally, unacceptably-high advantage for white is the reason that an undefended pawn is unconditionally classified as a fatal fault for any CRC position under my system.
__________
'I am not sure every pawn around the king has to be defended two times or more. FIDE chess has had, for over 500 years, the King Bishop's pawn defended by only the king, and this has not stopped FIDE chess from becoming the most popular Chess variant that we will ever have.'
Yes but ...
Standard Chess is the most stable FRC position available.
[You can quickly verify this fact by creating a select FRC scheme in a likewise manner as you created a select CRC scheme.]
______________________________________________________
'However, I can see why one may not want these weakly defended pawns in a Capa setup, since there is 18 pawns more power (2 more pawns, the archbishop, and the marshall/chancellor) on the board than in FIDE Chess.'
Exactly.
My analysis of fault-free and faulty positions exists entirely within the relative context of what resources are available with a given piece set and class of games. Consequently, I demand higher standards of the CRC piece set on the 10x8 board defensively than of the FRC piece set on the 8x8 board.
Since I have only developed one tool to date, the select CRC analysis tool, I realize this fact was unexplained and undemonstrated.
_____________________________________________________________
Whatever piece set and gameboard with 100's-1000's of possible opening setups is presented, my goal is to customize a method to it by:
1. Focusing upon a highly-selective set of positions based upon your well-defined, easily-used criteria as potentially most favorable, interesting, least asymmetrical and worthwhile to investigate in detail- existing in a number manageable for one person in terms of the time and work required.
2. Applying an extremely-selective filter so that only one to a maximum of a few of the very strongest positions available survive with a rating of fault-free.
The very best possible game(s) out of the vast number within a class should exist there. This is due to the fact that the number of pawn backups (in chess variants related to standard Chess) impose mathematical limitations upon what is possible, despite the vast number of tactical, offensive multi-move options available, to effectively imbalance the game to the further advantage of white (the player with the first move of the game).
*Edited - JG
For example, I only think color balance for pieces matter if the pieces are colorbound. It doesn't matter to me what colors non-colorbound pieces end up on, since those pieces can change color at will.
As another point, I no longer think it's essential that each and every pawn in the opening setup is defended. I think it's a good idea for white to be unable to threaten mate on his first move, since otherwise Black can be prevented from making natural developing moves in the opening; having all pawns defended stops these kinds of threats. One of my proposals posted in this thread, 'Narcotic chess' (RQNBKMBNAR), for example, has an undefended flank pawn, but appears to be a perfectly playable variant. The original Carerra setups (RANBQKBNMR and RMNBQKBNAR) have the same undefended flank pawn 'problem', but again appear perfectly playable.
I am not sure every pawn around the king has to be defended two times or more. FIDE chess has had, for over 500 years, the King Bishop's pawn defended by only the king, and this has not stopped FIDE chess from becoming the most popular Chess variant that we will ever have. However, I can see why one may not want these weakly defended pawns in a Capa setup, since there is 18 pawns more power (2 more pawns, the archbishop, and the matshall/chancellor) on the board than in FIDE Chess.
One thing I like to see in an opening setup is a Chess-like arrangement of the minor pieces. One problem with, say, RNBQKAMBNR, is that moving the center pawns forward two squares blocks the diagonals of the bishops, and it is difficult to make the knights active players in the game. The nice thing about, say, RQNBKABNMR, is that the knights, bishops, and center pawns are naturally developed without getting in each other's way.
So, in conclusion, since I have my own ideals about the initial position of the pieces, I will come up with a different opening setup than other chess variant inventors may decide upon,
- Sam
Select CRC Analysis Tool http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc The documentation has been expanded and revised so that the Zillions Of Games program is no longer needed to view all of this information in detail. Description http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/descript.pdf Faults http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/faults.pdf Ratings http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/ratings.pdf Report http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/report.pdf Summary- 48 Games http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/summary.pdf Presentation- 48 Games http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc/48-games.pdf
When I searched-out Opti Chess, I expediently focused-in upon a select set of only 24 CRC variants where the king & queen occupied the center files. 1. Indisputably, the queen is the most valuable piece in the game (after the king). 2. I consider the queen the most capable piece at protecting the king since the chancellor and archbishop can be threatened without reciprocity from a large distance by sliders that move differently. Specifically, the chancellor can be threatened by the bishop and the archbishop can be threatened by the rook. Nonetheless, I was intrigued by your assertion that the 2 other composite pieces (chancellor and archbishop) are worthy escorts for the king. So, I have been examining your select set of 72 CRC variants for a few days now. Using more stringent criteria, I determined all 24 CRC variants centered by the king & archbishop to have a minor fault due to the impossibility of placing BOTH the queen and the chancellor on opposite-colored spaces than the archbishop for balance. So, I felt no need to examine them in further detail. The reasons? 1. Composite pieces containing color-bound bishops (i.e., the queen & archbishop) should be on opposite (light-dark) spaces for balance. 2. Composite pieces containing color-changing knights (i.e., the chancellor & archbishop) should be on opposite (light-dark) spaces for balance. This left me with a select set of only 48 CRC variants (24 king & queen centered and 24 king & chancellor centered) that needed to be explored in detail- half of which I had examined long ago. Accordingly, I created a *.zrf to chart my results visually and when finished, conveniently share with others: Select CRC Analysis Tool http://www.symmetryperfect.com/shots/crc I hope you find it interesting.
In Falcon Chess we call '1 Ni1-h3; 2 -i5; 3 -h7' Fool's Mate because Queen or Bishop cannot checkmate in three like that with full help of Black. 'Helpmates' are Chess problems, started it says in 1854 by Max Lange in Deutscheschachzeitung, and of course perfected by Sam Loyd 1860 on. Both sides cooperate to checkmate Black. That's what a trivial Foolsmate entails from the opening, called a Helpmate if pieces already developed, but any win in fewer than 6 moves is surely a blunder. CVariantists are already admonished to avoid channeling openings to just few lines, on account of there being no net disadvantage to making mating threat from Move 1, by one (or maybe two)specific moves, in some of the ridiculous or overused initial set-ups and piece mixes ever under consideration.
There's a bug difference between a checkmate THREAT, and a Fool's Mate. By definition, a Threat is : 'if you don't react accordingly, you're lost'. In RNBAQKMBNR , after 1.Mh3, which threatens mate, black is FORCED to react. There are many ways, like moving a pawn around the King, which is absurd; or advancing the King's bishop's pawn, which hardly a developing move; or by 1.. Nh6 which gives white a very early pin, or 1..Mh6 which leads to a very early exchange of Marshalls. In Falcon Chess and Omega Chess, the threatened mate is a mate in 3, which is less forcing than a mate in 2. It's easily refutable by very natural developing moves that don't offend the sense of a chess player. In chess, there's the famous Scholar's mate, which actually, with white playing it, probably gives a weak position for white. While white moves his queen around, black is developing, leading to a (=+) position. Responding to 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 doesn't offend the sense of the chess player the way the above-mentioned Capa variant does. A Fool's mate is hardly worth discussion at all.
SRNSQKBNRBHowever, I think Sage chess works better on a 10x10 board. One possible 10x10 opening setup is:
PPPPPPPPPP .RNBQKBNR. S........SWhere '.' is an empty square, and 'S' is Camel (colorbound 1,3 leaper) + Bishop.
And yes, Sage chess also works very nicely if we replace the queen by the Marshall (Rook + Knight).
Again, these are just proposed ideas. I'm not formalizing a variant yet. I'm waiting to see if Greg can add the Sage to ChessV. I also need to study the opening in Schoolbook more. :)
When Carrera's was invented, Shakespeare was still writing plays and Newton was not yet born(1642). M. Winther writes, 'It is advantageous to the opponent should White threaten mate in the opening,' in Teutonic Chess, a new array of Carrera's Chess. There's hardly a large Chess without conceivable Fool's Mate in three, call it a threat or not. For example, Falcon Chess 8x10. There, if White moves Ni1-h3, then -i5, it threatens checkmate on the third move with the third move of that self-same Knight. However, Black's simple reply Ni8-j6 stops the attack and faces White with fork-mate threat in reverse, worsened by the i1-Knight's not being in place any more to thwart. So, exactly the same words of Winther apply, 'It is advantageous to the opponent...'
Sam, I still don't understand what you're on about. Anyway, I'm glad that you've stopped judging variants as inferior on the grounds that there is an initial mating threat. I removed my 'Teutonic Chess' from the Capa Wiki page, and from my homepage, because I think that this all is rather silly. Like I say on my homepage: 'It might seem superfluous to give it a new proper name when it is only a rearrangement of the initial position, but this is what people do.' Please don't insert the variant again. Even in a chess variants community there must be some limits to silliness. /Mats
I have talked with my legal department, and they inform me that I must make a prominent notice in 6-point text that this entire posting is a joke. Failure to see that this is a joke immediately causes the person reading this to forefit their entire lifetime savings to me. Please make you PayPal donation here
And, oh, I have updated the Capa wiki page to list Teutonic and Energizer.
Sam, what are you talking about? Am only I allowed to label variants with initial mating threat? I don't get it! /Mats
Here it is:
QRBNKANBRM 1. Ag3 mating threatSo, this is good news for Mats and bad news for the rest of us. The good news is that Mats now has 11, count them, 11 opening setups he can make Capa variants out of:
RQNBMKBNAR Md3 QRNBMKBNRA Md3 RBNQKMANBR Mg3 BRNQKMANRB Mg3 QRNBKMBNRA Mg3 BRNAQKMNRB Mh3 (Capa 1) RNBQAKMBNR Mh3 (Teutonic) BRNQAKMNRB Mh3 RABNQKNBMR Mh3 RQBNAKNBMR Mh3 QRBNKANBRM Ag3The bad news is that only 40 Capa setups are left for the rest of us.
Sibahi: I did not get your reply. Did you get Jeremy's message?
I partially agree with M Winther. I have two points to say in this regard: 1. White forcing black to react from move 1 can give White a HUGE advantage in the game. An example of this, since White's advantage in Atomic Chess (which is played quite regularly in FICS,) is very well established that you are not required to give a rematch if you win with black!! 2. However, this factor didn't prevent Atomic Chess from being one of the most fun playable chess variants.
Sam. the fact that a variant 'suffers from a 1st move mating threat' is of no consequence. In Teutonic Chess this is no problem at all. It is advantageous to the opponent should white threaten mate in the opening. This form of analysis is too simplistic. It makes an amateurish impression to list which variants suffer from a 1st move mating threat. /Mats
Greg, the zorkmid is also the official currency of Variantstown . See csipgs Chess, Introducing Economy in CVs and The Hitchhiker's Guide to Chess.
Hey, Sam! I can hardly wait! Do they come with a Certificate of Authenticity? For those unable to get in on Sam's generous offer, I propose Great Shatranj, which is actually a Capa variant. This fine and highly-luminous game, made with only the finest and most carefully-crafted synthetic pieces, has ALL the starting setups available [except for the single posted version - V#1, which I am keeping]. In fact, this is so new and these synthetic pieces are so different, that even the rare Gothic variant is available. That variant alone will go to the highest bidder. The others are all currently available at the low, low price of GUE $49.95 Zm.
Here is an updated list of known proposed Capa chess setups:
RANBQKBNMR Aberg RMNBQKBNAR Carrera RNBMQKABNR Bird RNBAQKMBNR Capa 1 (Suffers from 1.Mh3 mating threat) RNABQKBMNR Capa 2 RBQNKMNABR Grotesque RBNMQKANBR Univers RBQNKANMBR Landorean RNBQKMABNR Embassy RQNBAKBNMR Schoolbook NRMBQKBARN Optimized MRNBQKBNRA Paulowich 1 link ARNBQKBNRM Paulowich 2 link QRNBKABNRM Paulowich RNMBQKBANR Nalls link RNBQAKMBNR Teutonic link (1. Mh3 mating threat)Any without a link here are listed on on the Capablanca Chess Wiki page (I think I will add Teutonic to this page--sorry about the omission, Mats). And some more proposed opening setups, since not nearly enough Capa opening setups have been proposed :)
RNBQKAMBNR Consulate RNQBKMBANR Finesse RQNBKABNMR Notebook QRNBAKBNRM Closebook RNQBMKBANR Blackbook NRABQKBMRN Nightwink RQNBKMBNAR NarcoticSetups which suffer from white being able to threaten mate on the first move:
RQNBMKBNAR Md3 QRNBMKBNRA Md3 RBNQKMANBR Mg3 BRNQKMANRB Mg3 QRNBKMBNRA Mg3 BRNAQKMNRB Mh3 (Capa 1) RNBQAKMBNR Mh3 (Teutonic) BRNQAKMNRB Mh3 RABNQKNBMR Mh3 RQBNAKNBMR Mh3So, for aspiring Chess variant inventors, that leaves us with the following possible Capa opening setups:
QRBNAKNBRM RQBNMKNBAR NRBQAKMBRN RBNQAKMNBR NRBMQKABRN BRNMQKANRB RBNMQKANBR QRBNMKNBRA NRBQKMABRN RMBNQKNBAR ARBNQKNBRM RQBNKMNBAR BRQNMKNARB RBQNMKNABR NRQBMKBARN NRQBKABMRN RNQBKABMNR NRBAQKMBRN BRQNKANMRB BRANQKNMRB RBANQKNMBR BRNAQKMNRB RBNAQKMNBR MRBNQKNBRA QRBNKMNBRA RQBNKANBMR BRMNQKNARB RBMNQKNABR QRBNKANBRM NRBQKAMBRN NRQBAKBMRN BRNQKAMNRB RBNQKAMNBR RNQBAKBMNR BRQNAKNMRB RBQNAKNMBR NRBQMKABRN NRQBKMBARN BRQNKMNARB BRNQMKANRB RBNQMKANBR
So, aspiring inventors, don't miss out on this once-in-a-lifetime claim to be a Capa chess variant inventor. There are only 41 Capa setups left for you to claim! Get yours before it is too late!
QRNBKABNRM Paulovich 3mirrors my [2004-09-21] comment in Carrera's Chess, a game published in 1617 by D. Pietro Carrera (not related to Capablanca).
David Paulowich
(not related to Paulovich or Paulovits)
Sam, you didn't include my variant, Teutonic Chess, RNBQAKMBNR. http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/capablanca.htm I think that Capa 1 (which suffers from 1.Mh3 mating threat) is playable. 1.Mh3 is, arguably, a weak move that achieves nothing, except putting the Minister on the same diagonal as the enemy bishop. Although there may be better alternatives than Capa 1, it's not certain that a position suffering from an initial weakness is inferior. A mutual weakness in the opening position may create possibilities of seizing the initiative, something which enlivens the game (but I haven't analysed this position). /Mats
I like setup 4 best. Thought : Wouldn't the Queen better be replaced by a Marshall ?
Message #2255 in the 'Chess Variants' Yahoo group described 'a game with no name' by Derek Nalls that was, in retrospect, merely a flawed precursor of the game that became Optimized Chess by OmegaMan [my pen name for games I invent but do not recommend playing]. So, thank you but I doubt it is worthy of mention.
OK, I have been doing some thinking about Capablanca chess variants. As discussed before, there are some 126,000 possible Capablanca opening setups, where the bishops are on opposite colors, and where the queen is to the left of the queen. However, looking at all of the Capablanca opening setups which have actually been proposed, I observe that:
RANBQKBNMR Aberg RMNMQKBNAR Carrera RNBMQKABNR Bird RNBAQKMBNR Capa 1 (Suffers from 1.Mh3 mating threat) RNABQKBMNR Capa 2 RBQNKMNABR Grotesque RBNMQKARBN Univers RBQNKANMBR Landorean RNBQKMABNR Embassy RQNBAKBNMR Schoolbook NRMBQKBARN Optimized MRNBQKBNRA Paulovich 1 link ARNBQKBNRM Paulovich 2 link QRNBKABNRM Paulovich 3 RNMBQKBANR Nalls linkAll of these, should I note, are perfectly playable, with the exception of Capa 1, and all of these have not had their openings explored nearly enough. Doing some slightly creative math, that leaves us with 56 possible starting setups. Here are some interesting ones, with names that I propose for them: RNBQKAMBNR Consulate RNQBKMBANR Finesse RNQBKABNMR Notebook QRNBAKBNRM Closebook QRNBKABNRM BlackbookHere are three openings setups that are unplayable: RNBQAKMBNR 1. Mh3 mating threat QRNBMKBNRA 1. Md3 mating threat QRNBKMBNRA 1. Mh3 mating threatNow, if instead of a R+N and B+N piece, we add two colorbound Camel + Bishop (Sage) pieces, and have an 8x10 board, we have 36,000 total possible opening setups (Sages and Bishops on opposite colors, queen to the left of the king). Of those, all of 12 meet the requirements above: 1. SRNBQKBNRS 2. RSNBQKBNSR 3. RNSBQKBSNR 4. RNBSQKSBNR 5. SRBNQKNBRS 6. RSBNQKNBSR 7. RBSNQKNSBR 8. RBNSQKSNBR 9. NRSBQKBSNR 10. NRBSQKSBRN 11. BRSNQKNSRB 12. BRNSQKSNRBOf these 12 setups, I find 1, 4, and 12 the most interesting. No, I'm not proposing a new variant. I first need to fully explore the opening in Schoolbook. :) |
29 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.