| |
Main
Date: 23 Oct 2007 00:14:02
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
move as the new piece from the promotion square?
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy
Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000
This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
creator of the PIVOT!
Don't rely on overexposed, mass-keted commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
stole their ideas from others!
http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
The Official Ray Gordon Blog
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2007 04:35:23
From: j.d.walker
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Nov 5, 1:48 pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:30:06 -0000, "j.d.walker"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
> >looks and moves like a smaller version of the king,
>
> The Mini-Me has already been patented by Dr. Evil.
Mr. Murray,
Perhaps Kirsan could license the idea from Dr. Evil... I think if we
are to have new pieces, they might as well be miniature action figures
that look like Dr. Evil! Maybe they could be bobble-heads. Then
Kirsan could ink a deal with a famous worldwide fast-food chain to
give out these figures to kids buying happy meals. Think what this
might do for the cause of chess!! :^) There could even be a new
cartoon series called Dr. Evil Invades Chess... My mind is spinning
with all of these wonderful promotion ideas. I may have to go on
pilgrimage to see the great god of promotion, Truong.
Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Nov 2007 11:56:15
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
j.d.walker <[email protected] > wrote:
> Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "j.d.walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A
>>> prince looks and moves like a smaller version of the king,
>>
>> The Mini-Me has already been patented by Dr. Evil.
>
> Perhaps Kirsan could license the idea from Dr. Evil...
You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have bishops with
frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!
Dave.
--
David Richerby Enormous Indelible Cat (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a cuddly pet but it can't be erased
and it's huge!
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 11:31:23
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Nov 4, 7:14 am, "j.d.walker" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Nov 4, 3:21 am, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > j.d.walker wrote:
> > > On Nov 4, 1:37 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
> > > looks and moves like a smaller version of the king, but it can be
> > > captured, thus it cannot be checked or checkmated.
>
> > > An additional rule for princes. If the player's king is checkmated,
> > > it is removed from the board. If the player has a prince on the board
> > > it is promoted to the new king, provided that the new monarch would
> > > not enter the game in check. Then the game goes on.
>
> > > If there are several princes on the board for one's side when the
> > > player's king is mated, the player may choose which is to become
> > > king.
>
> > Not the first-born?
>
> > Which suggests another wrinkle - princes may capture each other!
>
> > > If the king is checkmated and there are no princes (no heirs to the
> > > throne) the game is lost as usual.
>
> > > King and prince versus lone king is an easy win making the prince
> > > stronger than a single knight or bishop at the end. But it is a slow
> > > piece so has less value earlier. Its additional value comes from its
> > > service as an insurance policy for the king's dynasty against
> > > checkmate.
>
> > > Pardon me if this seems "politically incorrect" to the modern mind. I
> > > am only thinking of the gaming aspect.
>
> > > Cheers,
> > > Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
>
> > --
> > Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
> > Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
> > University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
> > Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/
>
> Yet another idea... If you really want to throw a curve ball at
> opening theory try adopting this rule. Pawns promote on reaching the
> 6th rank. It gets radical quick. Lots of new attacking ideas and
> combinations.
>
> An alternative is promotion on reaching the 5th rank, but that is way
> too bloody.
As long as we're indulging in that sort of fantasy, we might want to
consider borrowing a rule from Shogi, Japanese chess, which allows not
just pawns, but pieces, to be promoted. Shogi uses a 9x9 board, and
the promotion line is your 6th rank, i.e. the opponent's 3rd rank. For
example, an unpromoted Shogi rook moves just like a chess rook, but
after reaching the promotion line, it gains the power to move one
square diagonally in addition to its normal orthogonal moves.
Perhaps a comparable change for Western chess would be to promote
pieces that reach the 8th rank. A bishop might become a rook, for
example. Or it might be granted a one-square orthogonal move, and the
rook granted a one-square diagonal move, as in Shogi.
Regarding pawns, one rule that has always seemed inconsistent to me
is that the power of capturing en passant is given only to pawns. That
seems illogical. If a black pawn on d7 does not have the right to
escape capture by a white pawn on e5 or c5, simply by moving d7-d5,
why is it immune from capture by a white bishop, knight, rook, queen
or king that can reach d6?
For all I know, chess variant enthusiasts have already tried these
ideas, and there are official names for these forms of chess.
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 12:14:13
From: j.d.walker
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Nov 4, 3:21 am, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> j.d.walker wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 1:37 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
> > looks and moves like a smaller version of the king, but it can be
> > captured, thus it cannot be checked or checkmated.
>
> > An additional rule for princes. If the player's king is checkmated,
> > it is removed from the board. If the player has a prince on the board
> > it is promoted to the new king, provided that the new monarch would
> > not enter the game in check. Then the game goes on.
>
> > If there are several princes on the board for one's side when the
> > player's king is mated, the player may choose which is to become
> > king.
>
> Not the first-born?
>
> Which suggests another wrinkle - princes may capture each other!
>
>
>
>
>
> > If the king is checkmated and there are no princes (no heirs to the
> > throne) the game is lost as usual.
>
> > King and prince versus lone king is an easy win making the prince
> > stronger than a single knight or bishop at the end. But it is a slow
> > piece so has less value earlier. Its additional value comes from its
> > service as an insurance policy for the king's dynasty against
> > checkmate.
>
> > Pardon me if this seems "politically incorrect" to the modern mind. I
> > am only thinking of the gaming aspect.
>
> > Cheers,
> > Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
>
> --
> Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
> Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
> University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
> Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/
Yet another idea... If you really want to throw a curve ball at
opening theory try adopting this rule. Pawns promote on reaching the
6th rank. It gets radical quick. Lots of new attacking ideas and
combinations.
An alternative is promotion on reaching the 5th rank, but that is way
too bloody.
Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 10:30:06
From: j.d.walker
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Nov 4, 1:37 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > Another way would be to allow a pawn to promote only to a piece which the
> > player has already lost.
>
> I think this could actually be a good idea. I have often felt having
> two queens is a bit weird.
>
> Firstly, I don't think bigamy is a good thing. :-) And it would feel
> more realistic to see one of the captured pieces return to the board
> (like a captive released from enemy prison by a clever peasant
> infiltrating behind enemy lines). The queen promotion seems more like
> human cloning or at least a setup for jealous rivalry between the new
> and old queen (the real world is rarely big enough for two queens -
> like in the history of Elisabeth 1 of England and y, queen of
> scots...).
>
> Secondly, most chess sets don't include an extra queen to place on the
> board in case of promotions and people have to use some other object
> or upside-down rook (if one has been captured). This rule change would
> allow everyone to play 100% correctly with a standard chess set.
>
> Thirdly, having two queens is an enormous increase in strength. It is
> almost the same as winning the game. By having the advantage reduced
> to other pieces I think the game could become more balanced and maybe
> even more interesting as we would see more "promotions" to pieces
> other than queen (which today is only seen in 3% of all promotions).
> It would also mean that the effect and importance of having a pawn
> reaching the enemy line will vary through the game according to which
> pieces have been captured up to that point (or is likely to be
> captured). So it could add another element of strategy to the game.
Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
looks and moves like a smaller version of the king, but it can be
captured, thus it cannot be checked or checkmated.
An additional rule for princes. If the player's king is checkmated,
it is removed from the board. If the player has a prince on the board
it is promoted to the new king, provided that the new monarch would
not enter the game in check. Then the game goes on.
If there are several princes on the board for one's side when the
player's king is mated, the player may choose which is to become
king.
If the king is checkmated and there are no princes (no heirs to the
throne) the game is lost as usual.
King and prince versus lone king is an easy win making the prince
stronger than a single knight or bishop at the end. But it is a slow
piece so has less value earlier. Its additional value comes from its
service as an insurance policy for the king's dynasty against
checkmate.
Pardon me if this seems "politically incorrect" to the modern mind. I
am only thinking of the gaming aspect.
Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
|
| | |
Date: 05 Nov 2007 13:48:03
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:30:06 -0000, "j.d.walker"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
>looks and moves like a smaller version of the king,
The Mini-Me has already been patented by Dr. Evil.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 05:21:08
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
j.d.walker wrote:
> On Nov 4, 1:37 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> Another idea. When a pawn promotes, it becomes a "prince." A prince
> looks and moves like a smaller version of the king, but it can be
> captured, thus it cannot be checked or checkmated.
>
> An additional rule for princes. If the player's king is checkmated,
> it is removed from the board. If the player has a prince on the board
> it is promoted to the new king, provided that the new monarch would
> not enter the game in check. Then the game goes on.
>
> If there are several princes on the board for one's side when the
> player's king is mated, the player may choose which is to become
> king.
Not the first-born?
Which suggests another wrinkle - princes may capture each other!
>
> If the king is checkmated and there are no princes (no heirs to the
> throne) the game is lost as usual.
>
> King and prince versus lone king is an easy win making the prince
> stronger than a single knight or bishop at the end. But it is a slow
> piece so has less value earlier. Its additional value comes from its
> service as an insurance policy for the king's dynasty against
> checkmate.
>
> Pardon me if this seems "politically incorrect" to the modern mind. I
> am only thinking of the gaming aspect.
>
> Cheers,
> Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.
>
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 01:37:48
From:
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
> Another way would be to allow a pawn to promote only to a piece which the
> player has already lost.
I think this could actually be a good idea. I have often felt having
two queens is a bit weird.
Firstly, I don't think bigamy is a good thing. :-) And it would feel
more realistic to see one of the captured pieces return to the board
(like a captive released from enemy prison by a clever peasant
infiltrating behind enemy lines). The queen promotion seems more like
human cloning or at least a setup for jealous rivalry between the new
and old queen (the real world is rarely big enough for two queens -
like in the history of Elisabeth 1 of England and y, queen of
scots...).
Secondly, most chess sets don't include an extra queen to place on the
board in case of promotions and people have to use some other object
or upside-down rook (if one has been captured). This rule change would
allow everyone to play 100% correctly with a standard chess set.
Thirdly, having two queens is an enormous increase in strength. It is
almost the same as winning the game. By having the advantage reduced
to other pieces I think the game could become more balanced and maybe
even more interesting as we would see more "promotions" to pieces
other than queen (which today is only seen in 3% of all promotions).
It would also mean that the effect and importance of having a pawn
reaching the enemy line will vary through the game according to which
pieces have been captured up to that point (or is likely to be
captured). So it could add another element of strategy to the game.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Nov 2007 17:58:42
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
<[email protected] > wrote:
> I think this could actually be a good idea. I have often felt having
> two queens is a bit weird.
>
> Firstly, I don't think bigamy is a good thing. :-) And it would feel
> more realistic to see one of the captured pieces return to the board
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that chess represents
some `reality' other than itself. While that might once have been the
case, it certainly isn't any more. It's just an abstract board game.
If you want `realism', I suggest you address the insistence that a
bishop can only move diagonally and a man on horseback only in weird
little L-shaped humps.
> Secondly, most chess sets don't include an extra queen to place on
> the board in case of promotions and people have to use some other
> object or upside-down rook (if one has been captured). This rule
> change would allow everyone to play 100% correctly with a standard
> chess set.
I can't actually remember the last time I had more than one queen on
the board. I grant that the proposal has slight practical benefit but
I don't think it's significant.
> Thirdly, having two queens is an enormous increase in strength. It
> is almost the same as winning the game.
So is being any piece up. Promoting a pawn, when the other person
can't, gives one a winning advantage in the current rules and the
proposed rules alike.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Sumerian Cat (TM): it's like a cat
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ that's really old!
|
| |
Date: 27 Oct 2007 03:56:55
From: help bot
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 27, 4:46 am, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> >> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
> >> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
>
> > Why does chess need this new rule?
>
> To confound computers that are on the verge of solving the existing game.
The simplest way to confound computers would be to
greatly enlarge the board. But there is no need to do
this in order to circumvent the problem of openings
theory having, to a great extent, "taken over" the game.
In most of the tournaments I have played in, one
player was considerably stronger than the other, and
in the old days such situations were made a bit more
interesting by the stronger player offering odds.
I imagine that if I were given odds by a stronger
player, the general character of the game would
remain intact, but, unless I were tricked into a book
line where the missing man or men were irrelevant
(in which case I simply need greater odds!), a new
factor is introduced: I now have the better endgame,
sometimes a win with best play, sometimes not.
But if you want to redress the problems with top
level players agreeing to uncontested draws, this
idea will be of no use, since they will all insist they
are the stronger player and should be giving the
other odds. The only way to deal with such dumb
animals is with a carrot and a stick.
A carrot might be to offer up what used to be
known as "brilliancy" prizes, or better yet, best
game prizes. This will provide the needed
motivation for some to strive to play their games
out properly.
For others, a stick is the proper tool. There will
always be a few who refuse to do anything more
than show up to collect their appearance fees;
such swine may be handled, first, by not offering
any appearance fees, and second, by paying the
money out based on actual performance, not the
dragging of fat lazy bottoms to the playing hall.
Organizers need to sten up a bit, get creative.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 06:12:54
From: RufusZ
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 23, 12:14 am, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
Why does chess need this new rule?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Oct 2007 05:46:59
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
>> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
>> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
>
> Why does chess need this new rule?
To confound computers that are on the verge of solving the existing game.
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy
Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000
This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
creator of the PIVOT!
Don't rely on overexposed, mass-keted commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
stole their ideas from others!
http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
The Official Ray Gordon Blog
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 23:02:11
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
[Crosspost trimmed]
Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\" <[email protected] > wrote:
>> Why does chess need this new rule?
>
> To confound computers that are on the verge of solving the existing
> game.
No they aren't. And, even if they were, chess would not be
significantly harder to solve even with this new rule.
And trim the signature. Four lines of eighty characters is standard
and sufficient; anything else can go on a web page.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Pickled Pointy-Haired Drink (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a refreshing juice beverage
that's completely clueless but it's
preserved in vinegar!
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 16:04:46
From: help bot
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 22, 11:14 pm, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
With all the "footers" appended to these troll posts,
it is difficult to determine if they are true "trolls", or
just an excuse to spam the newsgroups with self
ads.
Anyway, here is a critique of this latest one:
A while back, somebody posted here the rules
for crafting a good "troll" post, and it was clearly
stated that doing this in the same newsgroup too
often was a no-no. IMO, the inimitable Roy Gordon
has not merely broken this rule, he has smashed it
to tiny pieces and trampled the shards underfoot.
Another issue is the obvious lack of originality;
anybody know how many times this "rules change"
issue has already been done here recently? I
wouldn't want to be the one who had to try and
count them all up.
So then, in sum we have:
1) too much self-advertising
2) much too frequent trolling in same ng
3) a horrid lack of originality
Look, you need to consider the high standards we
have here in rgc. Take Sanny, for instance; he not
only created an entire Web site, but he also wrote
one of the worst chess programs around, just to
aid his trolling here! That took effort and imagination,
unlike your routine stuff. Get it in gear, dude -- you're
way behind the competition.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 15:46:36
From: Richard
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 23, 8:30 pm, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 8:12 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > AMERICAN CHESS ASSOCIATION
>
> > Laws of chess as modified in 1862 in London
>
> > Queening a Pawn
>
> > X111.--When a Pawn has reached the eighth square, the player has the
> > option of selecting a piece, whether such piece has been previously
> > lost or not, whose names and powers it shall then assume, OR OF
> > DECIDING THAT IT SHALL REMAIN A PAWN [italics mine].
>
> Right, that was known as the dummy pawn rule. Steinitz favored it.
> His "Modern Chess Instructor" (1889) cited in support a composed
> position given by L=F6wenthal in "The Book of the London Chess
> Congress, of 1862":
>
> W: Kg1, Bh3, b7, c6, e2
> B: Kg3, Ra8, Bh4, c7, e3, g2, g4, g6
>
> Here, after 1.bxa8, if the pawn must be promoted, to any piece at
> all, White loses by 1...gxh3 2.any h2#. However, if it can remain a
> dummy pawn on a8, then the game is drawn, e.g. 1...Kxh3 stalemate, or
> 1...g5 2.Bxg2.
> However, despite Steinitz's opinion, the dummy pawn rule was never
> widely adopted and is today just a trivia question.
That's very interesting. I have to agree with Steinitz. Thanks for
sharing.
--Richard
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 17:30:28
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 23, 8:12 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> AMERICAN CHESS ASSOCIATION
>
> Laws of chess as modified in 1862 in London
>
> Queening a Pawn
>
> X111.--When a Pawn has reached the eighth square, the player has the
> option of selecting a piece, whether such piece has been previously
> lost or not, whose names and powers it shall then assume, OR OF
> DECIDING THAT IT SHALL REMAIN A PAWN [italics mine].
>
Right, that was known as the dummy pawn rule. Steinitz favored it.
His "Modern Chess Instructor" (1889) cited in support a composed
position given by L=F6wenthal in "The Book of the London Chess
Congress, of 1862":
W: Kg1, Bh3, b7, c6, e2
B: Kg3, Ra8, Bh4, c7, e3, g2, g4, g6
Here, after 1.bxa8, if the pawn must be promoted, to any piece at
all, White loses by 1...gxh3 2.any h2#. However, if it can remain a
dummy pawn on a8, then the game is drawn, e.g. 1...Kxh3 stalemate, or
1=2E..g5 2.Bxg2.
However, despite Steinitz's opinion, the dummy pawn rule was never
widely adopted and is today just a trivia question.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 17:12:08
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
AMERICAN CHESS ASSOCIATION
Laws of chess as modified in 1862 in London
Queening a Pawn
X111.--When a Pawn has reached the eighth square, the player has the
option of selecting a piece, whether such p0iece has been previously
lost or not, whose names and powers it shall then assume, OR OF
DECIDING THAT IT SHALL REMAIN A PAWN [italics mine].
Guy Macon wrote:
> Crosspost to rec.games.chess.politics removed. Why are you posting
> non-political posts to a political newsgroup?
>
> Ray Gordon wrote:
>
> >I'm looking for ways to change the game enough to make current theory
> >invalid in a way that doesn't radically alter the game as Fischer Random
> >does.
>
> Why do you want to make current theory invalid? what is the purpose?
> What is the benefit? Also, *who* benefits and who doesn't? Patzers?
> Grandmasters? Computers?
>
> >I figure a slight tinkering with the promotion rules would accomplish
> >just that.
>
> Only if your goal is to make current endgame theory invalid.
> The proposed change wouldn't change opening theory at all.
> Most proposals to vchange the rules (Fischer Random, for
> example) have the goal of invalidating current opening study.
>
> --
> Guy Macon
> <http://www.guymacon.com/>
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 11:39:45
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
[email protected] <[email protected] > wrote:
> X111.--When a Pawn has reached the eighth square, the player has the
> option of selecting a piece, whether such p0iece has been previously
> lost or not, whose names and powers it shall then assume, OR OF
> DECIDING THAT IT SHALL REMAIN A PAWN [italics mine].
Um. What italics?
Dave.
--
David Richerby Miniature Tool (TM): it's like a handy
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ household tool but you can hold in it
your hand!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:20:43
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
[Crosspost trimmed.]
Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\" <[email protected] > wrote:
> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to
> make a move as the new piece from the promotion square?
Why? (Genuine question.)
Dave.
--
David Richerby Carnivorous Cheese Tool (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a hammer that's made of cheese
but it's full of teeth!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 04:38:04
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
On Oct 23, 9:14 am, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""
<[email protected] > wrote:
> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guruhttp://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
> Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy
>
> Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000
>
> This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
> creator of the PIVOT!
>
> Don't rely on overexposed, mass-keted commercial seduction methods which
> have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
> is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
> stole their ideas from others!
>
> http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
> The Official Ray Gordon Blog
How about allowing 8th and 1st rank pieces to be kept randomly.
When game begins only pawns are kept. Then Both players have their
choice to put any piece any where. But White can only put its pieces
on 1st rank and black on 8th rank.
If King and rooks are not on thier default place they are not allowed
to chastling.
So every game will have different opening.
But the number of pieces will be same that is 1 queen, 1 king, 2
bishops, 2 knights and 2 rooks. Only each player can arrange their
pieces in any order they want.
So every game new theory will be needed.]
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 20:49:55
From: SAT W-7
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
How about no castling at all and your opponent pulls your pieces out of
a hat ..Of course if he pulls the bishop out on the same color square it
go's to the next off color .. Pawns all stay the same....
You could have a tournament called Ultimate Chess Brain and have a
crystal brain as the trophy..
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 09:23:37
From: Tony Mountifield
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
In article <[email protected] >,
Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\" <[email protected] > wrote:
> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
How about we don't? :-)
Actually, your idea raises some issues:
a) What if the promoted piece gives check from the promotion square? Do
you then allow it to take the king?
b) In standard chess, if you move a man to a square from which it could on
the next move capture the king, then you are by definition giving check.
Applying the same logic to your proposal, any time you move a pawn to the
7th rank, with a promotion square available (either an empty square
directly ahead or an opposing man diagonally ahead), then you would be
giving check to a king that is any legal piece move from the potential
promotion square(s).
Cheers
Tony
--
Tony Mountifield
Work: [email protected] - http://www.softins.co.uk
Play: [email protected] - http://tony.mountifield.org
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 16:53:47
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
>> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
>
> How about we don't? :-)
>
> Actually, your idea raises some issues:
>
> a) What if the promoted piece gives check from the promotion square? Do
> you then allow it to take the king?
No. The King was (under these new rules) in check BEFORE the pawn
promoted. Just consider how many squares a pawn on the 7th rank "attacks"!
>
> b) In standard chess, if you move a man to a square from which it could on
> the next move capture the king, then you are by definition giving check.
> Applying the same logic to your proposal, any time you move a pawn to the
> 7th rank, with a promotion square available (either an empty square
> directly ahead or an opposing man diagonally ahead), then you would be
> giving check to a king that is any legal piece move from the potential
> promotion square(s).
>
correct.
> Cheers
> Tony
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 21:47:12
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
>> a) What if the promoted piece gives check from the promotion square? Do
>> you then allow it to take the king?
>
> No. The King was (under these new rules) in check BEFORE the pawn
> promoted. Just consider how many squares a pawn on the 7th rank
> "attacks"!
This would wreck all known tablebases.
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy
Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000
This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
creator of the PIVOT!
Don't rely on overexposed, mass-keted commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
stole their ideas from others!
http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
The Official Ray Gordon Blog
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 11:41:45
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\" <[email protected] > wrote:
>> The King was (under these new rules) in check BEFORE the pawn
>> promoted. Just consider how many squares a pawn on the 7th rank
>> "attacks"!
>
> This would wreck all known tablebases.
ZOMG how terrible. It would take, like, hours to recalculate them!
Dave.
--
David Richerby Broken Carnivorous Projector (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a 16mm film projector but
it eats flesh and it doesn't work!
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 08:35:16
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
>> How about we change the rules of chess to allow a promoted pawn to make a
>> move as the new piece from the promotion square?
>
> How about we don't? :-)
Doing nothing is chess's specialty from a governing standpoint, so that's a
good bet.
> Actually, your idea raises some issues:
>
> a) What if the promoted piece gives check from the promotion square? Do
> you then allow it to take the king?
No, but you can allow a second move to give check. "Check ends the move"
would also fix that.
My other idea was to allow only promotion to a knight on the first pawn
promoted, then knight or bishop on teh second, then knight, bishop or rook
on the third, then any piece on the fourth.
I'm looking for ways to change the game enough to make current theory
invalid in a way that doesn't radically alter the game as Fischer Random
does. I figure a slight tinkering with the promotion rules would accomplish
just that.
Another way would be to allow a pawn to promote only to a piece which the
player has already lost.
--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy
Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000
This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
creator of the PIVOT!
Don't rely on overexposed, mass-keted commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
stole their ideas from others!
http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
The Official Ray Gordon Blog
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:02:57
From: Guy Macon
Subject: Re: "extra move" pawn promotion rule change
|
Crosspost to rec.games.chess.politics removed. Why are you posting
non-political posts to a political newsgroup?
Ray Gordon wrote:
>I'm looking for ways to change the game enough to make current theory
>invalid in a way that doesn't radically alter the game as Fischer Random
>does.
Why do you want to make current theory invalid? what is the purpose?
What is the benefit? Also, *who* benefits and who doesn't? Patzers?
Grandmasters? Computers?
>I figure a slight tinkering with the promotion rules would accomplish
>just that.
Only if your goal is to make current endgame theory invalid.
The proposed change wouldn't change opening theory at all.
Most proposals to vchange the rules (Fischer Random, for
example) have the goal of invalidating current opening study.
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.guymacon.com/ >
|
|
