| |
Main
Date: 16 Mar 2008 10:50:26
From:
Subject: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
This is the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seirawan_chess
The configuration starts the same as in regular chess. Whenever a
piece in the back row vacates it spot and leave it open, the player
has the option of entering a Capablanca piece (Knight-Rook or Knight-
Bishop) onto the board into the space vacated. The Knight-Rook
(Elephant) and Knight-Bishop (Hawk) are two pieces that remain off the
board and can only enter when this happens. It is a double move like
castling, and works like en-passant in that you get once chance with
the original piece moving off to do that.
I was curious if anyone here had seen it, and your thoughts.
It had been going by Seirawan Chess, while Mr. Seirawan would like to
credit Mr. Harper for the design also, as he worked on it. I might
propose Sharper Chess as a name that might credit both them (S from
Seirawan combined with harper for Harper).
I see a variant off this where players before starting, can decide
whether to have a queen, elephant or hawk in the queen space to start.
Any comments?
- Rich
|
|
| |
Date: 25 Mar 2008 15:46:43
From:
Subject: Re: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
On 25, 7:46 am, Quadibloc <[email protected] > wrote:
> On 16, 6:59 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > It is
> > a way to do Capablanca Random Chess, without needing a bigger board.
> > There is also the risks when you play on the 10x8 board that the
> > Gothic Chess Federation will sue you if you do anything that comes in
> > range of matching their patented configuration.
>
> Sounds like, at this point, for those who think that pocket Princess
> and Empress chess makes the board too crowded,
That is a criticism of Seirawan or other games. There are ways to do
restrictions to prevent the congestion from happening, such as only
allow the pocket pieces to get on the board per each capture.
>and who would like a
> more conventional game at the cost of a larger board, I should note my
> own little suggestion at
>
> http://www.quadibloc.com/chess/ch0202.htm
>
> which may be of interest as it is, or as a basis for further
> developments.
Your game can be integrated into the IAGO Chess framework actually.
One thing it should hopefully to is allow people a chance to buy those
pieces you have. As of now, they can't. As far as on the
foundational level, there are problems with going with a larger
board. The top one is you can't acquire it. Rationalizations that
"making your own is cool", doesn't quite cut it. It is also too much
of a jump for normal chess players. I will say your desired end fits
with a lot of other people, particularly those who are involved with
the chess variant site.
By the way, consider looking at IAGO Chess, and seeing what you can do
in order to be able to get your game functioning:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSiagochesssyste
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 25 Mar 2008 15:41:10
From:
Subject: Re: Alternative to Seirawan Chess, IAGO Chess, is up on Chess
|
On 25, 7:41 am, Quadibloc <[email protected] > wrote:
> On 24, 8:22 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > A funny thing happened on the way to wanting to promote Seirawan
> > Chess. IAGO World Tour, in response to the question, was told by one
> > of the designers to "buzz off", and that he didn't like Chess
> > Variants, didn't care what the chess variant community named them, and
> > didn't want to have anything to do with chess variants.
>
> Since IAGO chess was developed only *after* this happened, then, I
> presume his complaint wasn't that IAGO was trying to claim ownership
> of Seirawan Chess - as it is doing, understandably enough, with its
> own invention, IAGO Chess.
The complaints were, by one of the designers, that they didn't like
the chess variant community, and didn't want their game changed in any
way (aka variants as I understand it, which means their pieces would
only be usable for their own game). They also didn't want Seirawan
Chess on the IAGO World Tour either. End result was a need for
something else to be done, that was sufficiently different enough, and
also cleaned up a few other issues in Chess (like the case of needing
to flip a rook in order to have a queen). Anyhow, what IAGO Chess now
isn't just some variant, but a framework to evolve chess. The
standard rules to Seirawan Chess can be plugged in and IAGO Chess is
still IAGO Chess. Seirawan, etc... would be credited for it.
> However, the names you are using, taken from Capablanca Chess, for
> those two combined pieces, aren't really the most common names used
> for them *either*, although Capablanca did use the name for the
> Chancellor previously established with Chancellor Chess.
Capablanca is like the center point in this. IAGO goes with the
names, as a tribute to the Capablanca center point now. It is also
done, in order for familiarity. A secondary objective is to have some
more generic pieces be introduced so Grand Chess,
> Instead, the combined piece Rook + Knight is usually known as an
> Empress, and the combined piece Bishop + Knight is usually known as a
> Princess.
And wheat do you then call the Queen+Knight piece if you do that, and
Amazon? As for Princess, the P is used for pawn. The Rook+Knight has
had several names. One of them is Empress. Another one is shall,
and another is Chancellor. According to the chessvariant site, there
are multiple names for the pieces. Seirawan uses none of them, by the
way.
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 25 Mar 2008 04:46:53
From: Quadibloc
Subject: Re: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
On 16, 6:59 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> It is
> a way to do Capablanca Random Chess, without needing a bigger board.
> There is also the risks when you play on the 10x8 board that the
> Gothic Chess Federation will sue you if you do anything that comes in
> range of matching their patented configuration.
Sounds like, at this point, for those who think that pocket Princess
and Empress chess makes the board too crowded, and who would like a
more conventional game at the cost of a larger board, I should note my
own little suggestion at
http://www.quadibloc.com/chess/ch0202.htm
which may be of interest as it is, or as a basis for further
developments.
John Savard
|
| |
Date: 25 Mar 2008 04:41:26
From: Quadibloc
Subject: Re: Alternative to Seirawan Chess, IAGO Chess, is up on Chess
|
On 24, 8:22 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> A funny thing happened on the way to wanting to promote Seirawan
> Chess. IAGO World Tour, in response to the question, was told by one
> of the designers to "buzz off", and that he didn't like Chess
> Variants, didn't care what the chess variant community named them, and
> didn't want to have anything to do with chess variants.
Since IAGO chess was developed only *after* this happened, then, I
presume his complaint wasn't that IAGO was trying to claim ownership
of Seirawan Chess - as it is doing, understandably enough, with its
own invention, IAGO Chess.
However, the names you are using, taken from Capablanca Chess, for
those two combined pieces, aren't really the most common names used
for them *either*, although Capablanca did use the name for the
Chancellor previously established with Chancellor Chess.
Instead, the combined piece Rook + Knight is usually known as an
Empress, and the combined piece Bishop + Knight is usually known as a
Princess.
John Savard
|
| |
Date: 24 Mar 2008 19:22:46
From:
Subject: Alternative to Seirawan Chess, IAGO Chess, is up on Chess Variants
|
On 16, 1:50 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> This is the Wikipedia entry:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seirawan_chess
... SNIP ...
> I see a variant off this where players before starting, can decide
> whether to have a queen, elephant or hawk in the queen space to start.
>
> Any comments?
> - Rich
A funny thing happened on the way to wanting to promote Seirawan
Chess. IAGO World Tour, in response to the question, was told by one
of the designers to "buzz off", and that he didn't like Chess
Variants, didn't care what the chess variant community named them, and
didn't want to have anything to do with chess variants. This is the
nutshell of the correspondence. So IAGO World Tour won't be able to
do Seirawan Chess.
Well, in response to this an alternative to Seirawan Chess was
developed, that does similar, but is far more robust in its style, and
designed to evolve over time. It also incorporates the world of chess
variants into it. It goes by IAGO Chess, and is on the chess variants
website at IAGO Chess System (this was due partly due to an oops in
trying to get the rules up on the website). The URL is here:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSiagochesssyste
The pieces follow the standard Capablanca piece, and is designed to
add new pieces later (such as the Empress), and accomodate just about
all variants of FIDE chess that you find on the chess variants site.
Please feel free to check it out and comment. It isn't meant to be
some revolutionary, "I am more brilliant than everyone else, pay
attention", but a practical solution to enable chess to continue to
evolve and integrate variants into its framework, without them being
viewed as some unwelcome freaks.
By the way, FIDE Chess is also in there, for those who don't want to
do variants.
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 16 Mar 2008 17:59:19
From:
Subject: Re: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
On 16, 8:43 pm, "Robin King" <[email protected] > wrote:
> With all of the chess variants in existence, can we not find
> one that has been played enough to ensure that there aren't glaring
> flaws in it?
There are plenty out there. Each try to do different things. I don't
believe the future of chess will be in a single game personal. FIDE
chess is set. But I do believe that a handful of games, going in
different directions, can be adopted. What I see of interest in his
variant is that it provides a stable way for chess to grow, and add
new pieces, as time goes on. This is what piques my interest about
it. This approach can work with any chess like game also, like with
Shogi reverting back to its original form and the Rook-Bishop pieces
coming on the board the way that laid out by Seirawan-Harper. This
method can work with Chess960 also, and a bunch of other games. It is
a way to do Capablanca Random Chess, without needing a bigger board.
There is also the risks when you play on the 10x8 board that the
Gothic Chess Federation will sue you if you do anything that comes in
range of matching their patented configuration.
> Also, there's no need to rename these pieces - they already
> have plenty of names. Check out the Piececlopedia on the Chess Variant
> pageshttp://www.chessvariants.org/index/mainquery.php?type=Piececlopedia&o...
> for the Empress, shall, Chancellor (Rook-Knight combo), and
> Princess, Archbishop, Cardinal, Paladin (Knight-Bishop combo).
I will say that this needs to be ironed out, the standardization of
names. As tournament play for variants gets established,
standardization of names, and so on, should come about. That is
actually one of the objectives of IAGO is to help with the
standardization of the naming of pieces. IAGO is relying on people
involved with the chess variants site for this.
As for this particular case, if Hawk and Elephant do get adapted, I
would suggest they be the name for the POCKET version of the
Chancellor and Archbishop.
I will add here, I also believe there should be a standardized/top
form of chess that will continue to adapt and change its rules every
few years. Pretty much, the moment they start writing books to
analyze how it is played, you change the rules.
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 16 Mar 2008 17:51:24
From:
Subject: Re: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
On 16, 4:20 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> It's not quite clear how many hawks and/or elephants there may be on
> the board. Is the limit just one of each? Saying "Whenever a piece in
> the back row vacates it spot, the player has the option of entering a
> Capablanca piece," makes it sound like as many as eight new pieces per
> side could be introduced, which could leave only 16 unoccupied squares
> on the board.
Best to go to the links and check it out. I was doing an abridge
version. You get one of each of those, and I was explaining how many
enter.
> How did they hit on "elephant" and "hawk," I wonder? "Elephant" was
> originally the name given to the piece that moves like today's bishop
> in the acient (circa 600-700 CE) Indian game Chaturanga. Capablanca's
> names were shall (R+N) and Chancellor (B+N). Later Chancellor was
> given to the R+N piece, and the B+N named Archbishop. Capa first
> proposed a 10x10 board, later changed to 10x8.
I believe Elephant because that was in the past actually. Not sure
why. Hawk was related to hunter somehow.
> The idea of adding two such pieces goes back well before
> Capablanca. British master Henry Edward Bird had made a similar
> proposal back in the 1870s, and before him the Italian Pietro Carrera
> in Il Giuoco degli Scacchi (1617). See D.B. Pritchard's "Encyclopedia
> of Chess Variants" for more information.
What is worked on here is doing it on an 8x8 board. And while those
two pieces are typically what gets add it, the methodology of adding
them is what interests me, and leads a way to make chess a game that
is expandable, while being stable. Other pieces besides those two
could be added through that method.
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 16 Mar 2008 13:20:20
From:
Subject: Re: Anyone else check out the chess variant by Seirawan and Harper?
|
On 16, 1:50=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> This is the Wikipedia entry:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seirawan_chess
>
> The configuration starts the same as in regular chess. =A0Whenever a
> piece in the back row vacates it spot and leave it open, the player
> has the option of entering a Capablanca piece (Knight-Rook or Knight-
> Bishop) onto the board into the space vacated. =A0The Knight-Rook
> (Elephant) and Knight-Bishop (Hawk) are two pieces that remain off the
> board and can only enter when this happens. =A0It is a double move like
> castling, and works like en-passant in that you get once chance with
> the original piece moving off to do that.
>
> I was curious if anyone here had seen it, and your thoughts.
>
> It had been going by Seirawan Chess, while Mr. Seirawan would like to
> credit Mr. Harper for the design also, as he worked on it. =A0I might
> propose Sharper Chess as a name that might credit both them (S from
> Seirawan combined with harper for Harper).
>
> I see a variant off this where players before starting, can decide
> whether to have a queen, elephant or hawk in the queen space to start.
>
> Any comments?
> - Rich
It's not quite clear how many hawks and/or elephants there may be on
the board. Is the limit just one of each? Saying "Whenever a piece in
the back row vacates it spot, the player has the option of entering a
Capablanca piece," makes it sound like as many as eight new pieces per
side could be introduced, which could leave only 16 unoccupied squares
on the board.
How did they hit on "elephant" and "hawk," I wonder? "Elephant" was
originally the name given to the piece that moves like today's bishop
in the acient (circa 600-700 CE) Indian game Chaturanga. Capablanca's
names were shall (R+N) and Chancellor (B+N). Later Chancellor was
given to the R+N piece, and the B+N named Archbishop. Capa first
proposed a 10x10 board, later changed to 10x8.
The idea of adding two such pieces goes back well before
Capablanca. British master Henry Edward Bird had made a similar
proposal back in the 1870s, and before him the Italian Pietro Carrera
in Il Giuoco degli Scacchi (1617). See D.B. Pritchard's "Encyclopedia
of Chess Variants" for more information.
|
|
