[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Game Reviews by JohnLewis
Both sets of 480 are played for aesthetic reasons.
Because there is no standard numbering system for Fischer Random Chess (Chess960), it would be hard for me to make a rule to explain which are duplicates due to being mirrors. It's likely that any system for generating all 960 positions would probably start mirroring at 480... so 480 and 481 would likely be mirrored positions.
I think I can clear up the problems presented by those who are mystified by the rules of Stanley Random Chess. As the current American Grand Master, I can assure you that even I find it hard to keep up with the volumes of rules and stipulations that are involved. In fact, I would suggest that about 50% of the moves I make feel as if they were chosen at random from all the possible moves available at that time. It's only afterwards that I'm able to determine the reason for my own errors, after looking up the specifics of the situation in my leatherbound library. (My personal Achilles Heel are the moon phase transition instituted in Berlin, 1484.) So while I often like to open with e4, about half the time my opening move is substituted with the nearest legal ('random', to the layman) move from all the available legal moves. Again, I've never failed to be able to find the rational for this transition upon review of the historical journals. I almost always find time to note these transitions to my opponent, who sometimes finds such things humourous. For example, when a King joins inline with a row of pawns, this is known as 'Slumming'. When a Queen is prematurely brought into play she is often refered to as 'Dancing'. The terminology is quiet liberating. Should you have further questions, I'm sure playing a game would satisfy your curiosity. Feel free to challenge me on Scheming Minds.
I agree that white almost always wins unless the player is a novice. The game is very interesting but I think for it to be a good or excellant variant it will require a tweaking to make black more competative. Perhaps Black must be the first to force a color switch.
Both the previous poster claim that the use for Castling is to move the King from the center of the board to safety in the corner but both give extremely ignorant reasoning when there are numerous positions in Chess960 where the King does not move at all if he Castles.
If Castling is about moving the King to safety then I challenge that Chess960 is much less helpful in this regard because of the cases where the King is already in the spot it would move to.
In these same situations, using Orthodoxed Castling, the King would indeed move to a safer position two spaces away regardless of his starting position.
If Castling is about moving the King to safety then I challenge that Chess960 is much less helpful in this regard because of the cases where the King is already in the spot it would move to.
In these same situations, using Orthodoxed Castling, the King would indeed move to a safer position two spaces away regardless of his starting position.
The original intent of castling was to move the king to either wing, centralize the rook and connect the 2 rooks.
You clearly don't have a grasp of the history of castling and are confusing what modern strategy guides explain as the advantages of castling as opposed to the reasons for castling.
You assume that the original inventors of castling had the intention you mention but didn't both to read the article(s) I linked to which explained how castling evolved.
I understand your 'bunker' concept, but even in this case if the King is already in his bunker there is no use for castling from that position. You have to admit that is true. In Orthodoxed Castling there is at least a reasonable and tactical use for Castling to extract a king from a dangerous situation.
Fischer is, of course, a brilliant man, but that does not make him a game designer. I am a game designer and I can tell you that his castling rules are overly complicated, cumbersome, and take up almost half of his explanation of his variant. No, I think Fischer just dropped the ball on this one.
You clearly don't have a grasp of the history of castling and are confusing what modern strategy guides explain as the advantages of castling as opposed to the reasons for castling.
You assume that the original inventors of castling had the intention you mention but didn't both to read the article(s) I linked to which explained how castling evolved.
I understand your 'bunker' concept, but even in this case if the King is already in his bunker there is no use for castling from that position. You have to admit that is true. In Orthodoxed Castling there is at least a reasonable and tactical use for Castling to extract a king from a dangerous situation.
Fischer is, of course, a brilliant man, but that does not make him a game designer. I am a game designer and I can tell you that his castling rules are overly complicated, cumbersome, and take up almost half of his explanation of his variant. No, I think Fischer just dropped the ball on this one.
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.