Main
Date: 27 Jan 2007 14:12:48
From: J0hnMacIntyre
Subject: Queen's Battle, a new variation
Hey all...

My son, Keaton, is about an 800 player in Washington State. He got a
tournament chess set just after Christmas that contained extra queens.
He liked to play his parents, and often himself. While playing with the
pieces, especially the extra queens he stumbled across a formation he
calls Queen's Battle.

It turns out it is quite fun, and instructive. If chess is art, then
this is using the small box of crayons, with wide lines to color in.
It is simpler, but quite sharp. It keeps the attention of the
experienced and novice alike. It helps develop concepts of time, space,
access, and zugzwang.

It uses all the same rules of chess, however there are only 5 pawns, a
King, and 2 (two) queens on each side. The position starts oddly
balanced, and testing the game via Fritz shows that the game is not
apparently busted (no forced win or draw at start, though that may be
shown to be incorrect) and different engines seem to play the game in
different styles. And it is easy to play this game against a computer.

Castling obviously does not apply, but enpassant rules do. As do
promotion rules. There is an optional rule that 3 consecutive checks
are a draw, but that rule looks to only prevent my wife from making the
game to dull, as opposed to any specific reason. But it may be important.

This is how the game starts (FEN)


2q1kq2/2ppppp1/8/8/8/8/2PPPPP1/2Q1KQ2 w - - 0 0

A large percentage of the games are decided by pawn structure and
promotion. Or draw by repetition. Or simply basic mating tactics. So it
blitzes through many of the ideas that are important for a young chess
player to develop.

I would love to see what you think about the game, and if you would like
to publish it, feel free, but please use my son's name as the creator.

Thanks, and I look forward to hearing from you.




 
Date: 28 Jan 2007 12:15:56
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Queen's Battle, a new variation
J0hnMacIntyre <[email protected] > wrote:
> My son, Keaton, is about an 800 player in Washington State. He got
> a tournament chess set just after Christmas that contained extra
> queens. He liked to play his parents, and often himself. While
> playing with the pieces, especially the extra queens he stumbled
> across a formation he calls Queen's Battle.
>
> It turns out it is quite fun, and instructive.

It might be worth submitting a page to chessvariants.com about this: I
don't know if they'd be interested but you don't know until you try
(or ask them). I'd leave out the three checks rule and clarify
whether promotion to pieces other than queens is allowed. It might be
worth waiting a little while to see if anyone comes up with a bust for
the game and to check that it seems reasonably balanced between the
two players.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Permanent Miniature Shack (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a house in the woods but you
can hold in it your hand and it'll be
there for ever!


  
Date: 28 Jan 2007 09:08:56
From: J0hnMacIntyre
Subject: Re: Queen's Battle, a new variation
David Richerby wrote:
> J0hnMacIntyre <[email protected]> wrote:
>> My son, Keaton, is about an 800 player in Washington State. He got
>> a tournament chess set just after Christmas that contained extra
>> queens. He liked to play his parents, and often himself. While
>> playing with the pieces, especially the extra queens he stumbled
>> across a formation he calls Queen's Battle.
>>
>> It turns out it is quite fun, and instructive.
>
> It might be worth submitting a page to chessvariants.com about this: I
> don't know if they'd be interested but you don't know until you try
> (or ask them). I'd leave out the three checks rule and clarify
> whether promotion to pieces other than queens is allowed. It might be
> worth waiting a little while to see if anyone comes up with a bust for
> the game and to check that it seems reasonably balanced between the
> two players.
>
>
> Dave.
>
Thanks,
They have some fairly specific rules about submissions, which would make
this not qualify yet.

But I will put up a web page, and until the time has passed, I hope that
folks will give it a try.



 
Date: 27 Jan 2007 15:51:33
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Queen's Battle, a new variation
On Jan 27, 4:12 pm, J0hnMacIntyre <[email protected] >
wrote:
> Hey all...
>
> My son, Keaton, is about an 800 player in Washington State. He got a
> tournament chess set just after Christmas that contained extra queens.
> He liked to play his parents, and often himself. While playing with the
> pieces, especially the extra queens he stumbled across a formation he
> calls Queen's Battle.
>
> It turns out it is quite fun, and instructive. If chess is art, then
> this is using the small box of crayons, with wide lines to color in.
> It is simpler, but quite sharp. It keeps the attention of the
> experienced and novice alike. It helps develop concepts of time, space,
> access, and zugzwang.
>
> It uses all the same rules of chess, however there are only 5 pawns, a
> King, and 2 (two) queens on each side. The position starts oddly
> balanced, and testing the game via Fritz shows that the game is not
> apparently busted (no forced win or draw at start, though that may be
> shown to be incorrect) and different engines seem to play the game in
> different styles. And it is easy to play this game against a computer.
>
> Castling obviously does not apply, but enpassant rules do. As do
> promotion rules. There is an optional rule that 3 consecutive checks
> are a draw, but that rule looks to only prevent my wife from making the
> game to dull, as opposed to any specific reason. But it may be important.
>
> This is how the game starts (FEN)
>
> 2q1kq2/2ppppp1/8/8/8/8/2PPPPP1/2Q1KQ2 w - - 0 0
>
> A large percentage of the games are decided by pawn structure and
> promotion. Or draw by repetition. Or simply basic mating tactics. So it
> blitzes through many of the ideas that are important for a young chess
> player to develop.
>
> I would love to see what you think about the game, and if you would like
> to publish it, feel free, but please use my son's name as the creator.
>
> Thanks, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Looks like a great position for beginners, and fun for more advanced
players, too.... I don't like the optional rule, but the alternative
would require scorekeeping (no fun for a beginners' game).