Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Changing the shape of the board can also have fortunate consequences. Consider replacing the General-Adjutants on Gustav III's board with Chinese Cannons. Clearly a fair amount of patience will be required in order to develop these Cannons effectively. But what about (pawnless) endgames?
White K(b3), C(b5), C(b7)
Black K(a1)
After 1.Cf7 Ki1 2.Cf1 Ka1 3.Cd5 Kb1 4.Cdd1 Black is checkmated. This is not an accident - it should always be possible to force the lone King down to the first rank in this kind of endgame. This is a welcome change from the standard 8x8 board, where checkmate cannot be forced by a pair of cannons.
The gustavian board is ideal for creating variants whose complexity is within human grasp, yet not too complex and long-winded. An obvious problem in Fide-Chess is that the complexity is somewhat too low (that is, for advanced players). This makes drawn games too probable. Tournament organizers often complain that players are too willing to accept a draw. But this is not the whole truth. Chess is actually rather drawish. An obvious example is the French Exchange: 1.e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3.exd5... What to do? Already at this stage we have arrived at a drawn position. Playing seriously for a win here would entail too great strategical risks. Capablanca tried to remedy this problem by introducing Capablanca's Chess. It is fun, but it could be argued that the tactical complexity here is too high for the general player. It's much about calculating variations and foreseeing combinations involving the very combinative extra pieces. The gustavian board could remedy this by its smaller size, and by introducing a pair of pieces that are less tactical (the Amazon, too, because of its high value, is less tactical than the Capablanca pieces). I have in many variants placed the knights at the corners. This seems to work very well. They are not too far away, while there exist routes to fine positions, the K3/Q3 squares, and the B4 squares, which are not easily accessible to a knight on its standard square. /Mats
I have now corrected the preset for the chess variant created by King Gustav III of Sweden (1746-92). It is a royal variant that functions very well.
Is this preset broken? All 5 of the logs for finished games show that the log has 'been deleted' when the log link is clicked on.
5 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Changing the shape of the board can have unfortunate consequences - in Omega Chess endgames a Rook is not always sufficient mating force. That problem does not occur on Gustav III's board, however. In fact very little seems to have changed here for Knights and Bishops and Rooks.
White K(b3), N(c2), N(e1)
Black K(i1)
In this position White (to move) mates in 2 moves. This shows that a lone King may blunder into a quick checkmate by two Knights. But, in general, checkmate cannot be forced by a pair of knights. The same situation holds on the standard 8x8 board.