Comments by bukovski

Are the generals in the Korean chaturaji confined to the four points of one
castle square only, and what is the significance of two different pawn
types -- direction?

The three different castles on each side of the Korean grand chess are
curious, too.  These would be nice games to have recorded authoritatively
on these pages!

The added photos of a hiashatar set bring to mind a question for others who play this game: which version of the move for the hia do you prefer?  There are two mentioned on this site, one by Mr Kisliouk and the other by Mr Winther -- I much prefer Mr Winther's suggestion, even if it is not historical.  There is a third choice: Mr Cazaux has synthesized a set of observations from Mongolia into a move.

I wonder if the different iconographies of the piece -- advisor or warrior -- could match variations in the way the piece moves when Mongolians play the game.

It was very good to include this variant among those described on CV pages.  Play-tested variants, even when complex like tenjiku shogi, are the most valuable offerings on the CV pages, in my opinion.

I look forward to Dr Muller's development of HaChu to play tenjiku shogi; that would be most welcome in the absence of human, over-the-board players.

Another CV page presenting Colin Adams's exemplar games, study of opening theory for tenjiku shogi, and arguments for understanding what the move of the Lion Hawk is or should be, would complement this fine presentation of rules of play.  It is perhaps too much to hope that he will read this comment and add such a contribution.

I have always valued commented game scores as an instructive resource for learning how to play a variant better.  I remember Dr Gralla and Mr Carrillo produced some fine games of makruk that appeared on CV pages; it would be wonderful if that were a regular part of new variants showcased here.

So as not to lose sight of the question what are the rules of the Korean
chaturaji variant in the Youtube video linked at the start of this comments
list, I reviewed the video and still am stymied evaluating differences of
pawn types and move, king "telepotency" to check an opposing king, and
range of the king within the reshaped fortress.  A playable variant is a
treat; a playable, four-player variant even more so.  Would any Korean
readers be aware of this game, its diffusion, its pedigree?  I notice that
the person who posted the video also has a few other multiplayer Korean
chess variants, all equally enigmatic for what the video presents and does
not, and all missing some evaluation of the question whether they are good,
playable chess variants.

If someone could afford it (or want it), today I saw for sale a set of wooden tai shogi pieces in Japan: http://www.tohsin.com/meihin/koma263-2.html

A bit dear for me at JPY ５５５，０００.

Dr Muller, I read your very intriguing presentations of errata in the tsumechushogi problems from collections A, B, and C published in Middle Shogi Manual.  I have to wonder whether there are errata in collection D that your analysis has revealed and whether you would think such fine studies worthy to add to CVP.

I always like your variants and find it interesting that you chose to improve on shatar.  I wonder if your experience has revealed whether this variant is more drawish with the use of the hia and the older shatar restrictions on delivering checkmate.  Do you think if one of the knights were to have the "enhanced" powers that Assia Popova described as appearing in the older shatar, that is, knight becomes an amazon after the first move, it would produce a balanced game affording more chances of checkmate?  I am assuming, of course, that my intuition about this variant being more drawish than shatar is true, but perhaps it is not.  I very much like your use of José Carrillo's modification to the hia power, which seems to create pleasing positional paradoxes.

Dr Muller, thank you for WinBoard wa shogi -- what a nice present for the new year!

Here is an oft-forgotten but enjoyable game that uses those same type of pieces as Capablanca chess plus an amazon: Gollon's "Turkish" Great Chess I.

Dr Muller, you mention the bare king rule as used by the Nihon Chu Shogi Renmei, but I have to wonder if your computer analysis has revealed what pieces singly or in combination are sufficient to force or at least deliver checkmate on a bare king in chu shogi.

I have sampled a few games of hiashatar on an 8x10 board and have concluded that it results in much too constricted positions, even if pieces come into contact sooner and the balance of open squares and number of pieces matches chess.  I have seen hia chess on CVP and would like to know if others have experience of the hia on a smaller board and have evaluated its suitability for a board of fewer ranks.  I used to think hiashatar seemed too large, but now I am unsure.  I would welcome opinions or accounts of player experiences.

I notice that the board has a river like xiangqi.  Would I be correct to think that janggi had this board feature in the past but developed a board without it, or is this another anachronism (or mistake)?  These are nice images that you posted, so thank you.

@Fergus Duniho and @Greg Strong: Does your evaluation of Courier Chess include the 19th-century Kurierspiel described here on CVP?

@Dr Muller: You had mentioned that you had analyzed the D document of historic chu shogi problems in MSM, had reserved the results of your analysis, and had concluded that 18 were proven flawed.  I wonder if you had reached a conclusion about the 18 like one that Mr Hodges proposed about the D document generally, that necessary pieces possibly had been omitted or erroneous pieces introduced into the diagram to act as a security device against plagiarism.  I read your suggested corrections to problems in the other 3 collections; I do not ask you to divulge more than you want about D, only to ask if your research suggested that the flawed problems might be fixed by the removal, change, or addition of pieces to the diagram.  Kind regards!

So no free arrangement of pieces behind the pawn line like sittuyin, only the possible transposition of cannon and van before the start of the game? I look forward to trying this variant.

Is there a Mongolian reader of this site who can tell if there is good historical value in this book: https://www.taobao.com/list/item/555469295901.htm, the parallel Chinese title of which seems to say it treats the historical origin of shatar? It is a little perplexing or enticing that the cover seems to sport the playing board for ix buga, a version of merels, maybe?