Comments by Jianying Ji

Excelent and under-appreciated gem! In a few game of this variant, 
I found how the simplest change alters the game dramatically. For
example this variant makes bishop no longer color bound, and 
nullifies the use of castling.

I have thought about it for quite a while, that chess lacks a coherent
handicap system. (A good example of a coherent handicap system is that 
of go) How do we go about crating one for chess? Certainly chess for
different armies of ralph betza points the way forward. Black Ghost of
Ralph Betza is a step toward a handicap system. Using these as stepping
stones, let me propose the following:

Types of Handicap:

Range: Gradual limiting of the range of stronger player's pieces 

Functional: Limiting the leaping/capturing ability of the stronger player

Balancing: Adding power to the weak side, for example adding of a ghost
 like in ghost chess.

Of course how a comprehensive system might look like, I'm not sure yet,
 so any comments welcome.

Absolutely cool! Very well explained! Simpler in feel and direct in play 
#than some of the other similar ideaed games

Continuing with this subject let me propose the following:

let their be 9 levels of mastery (similar to asian game ratings, but 
                                  in keeping with western chess theme,
                                  we need a different name than dan)

Between each level and the one below is divided 4 sublevels. 
(Again a name is sought)

The difference between sublevels is one point, as described by Ralph Betza

in  http://chessvariants.com/d.betza/pieceval/p3-01.html.  The move is 
good enough for difference of one sublevel.

The difference between levels is then naturally 4 points, or pawn and
move.

For other handicaps we need to temper with the army somewhat, but 
whatever we do must be ballanced, from openning to endgame.

Also as can be calculate, I envision the largest handicap to be 36 
points, roughly the value of an amazon. I think this is a reasonable
 upperbound but as I am not a good chess player, input would be really 
appreciated.

This game is highly remaniscent of Capriccio described by Mark Thompson
at
http://home.flash.net/~markthom/html/capriccio.html. though maybe arguably

better since the goal is better defined.

I am creating a pawnless CV, which suddenly led to the question of:

What happens in FIDE chess if we remove the pawns and disallow castling.
Does white have overwhelming advantage or is there a good defense for 
black?

Continuing what Ralph said about the need for more prominent heading for
chess history. One possible idea is a specific page on the history of 
chess that shows a genealogy of chess. A genealogy because it shows both
history and the relationship between the different historical variants.
Such an undertaking would be no small one by any means but would provide
a good context for the layman and scholar alike in the foundations of 
this pusuit of variants.

Since the major pieces in the back row are weak, it might make sense for
the following variant:

No apprentices, Just the backrow pieces. and have the pieces promote to
full strength when they reach the backrow. With the same object of
checkmating the king.

The diagrams will have to be described using FFEN, which the FFEN to HTML
converter will take care of the rest. And probably lots of proofreading.
But it is possible.

Every move imitates the ability of the piece moved before, except the
first move for nothing is before it. What if time is circular, in that
spirit I propose the following variant:

As a first move, any piece can be moved with any power, however this
implies the last move must be made with a piece with such power, and
any move during the game that would make such a ending impossible is 
declared illeagal.

I have been studying the advices in this thread and examining some of 
my ideas along this line. The following is what I have developed so far:

Pawnless Chess

-by Jianying Ji			

Introduction:

This variant is inspired  these primary sources: 
1: Kevin Maroney's Ur Chess
2: Ralph Betza's Halfling Chess

One of the main motivations of this variant is similar to that of Ur Chess
in that I was looking for a 'simplified' variant of chess. As I read Ur
chess I saw that many of the fiddly rules he was trying to change concerned
pawns, so it seemed natural to me to dispense with pawns alltogether. But
that led to an immediate problem, which is with the major pieces of FIDE
facing each other the opening usually end up with a lot of exchanges and
not many pieces on the board after the exchanges end.  To combat this, the
pieces needs to be weakened and captured pieces recycled. So I used
halfling chess to weaken the pieces, and added the capture return rule to
recycle the pieces. I changed the knight to halfling Knightrider to
strengthen the army a bit so that it won't be too slow. The details
follows:

Board and Setup:

Use standard chess board and setup with the pawns removed

r n b q k b n r
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
R N B Q K B N R

Rules:

1. All pieces move as they do in halfling chess, except the knight, 
which becomes a halfling knightrider.

Motivation: To weaken the pieces so the opening will be more strategic,
rather than tactical. As Peter Aaronson suggested and Ralph Betza showed.

2. A captured piece is returned to the owner, who is to put it back on 
its starting rank. It is the owner's choice, which open square to put 
the returned piece on.  If the starting rank is fully occupied then 
the captured piece is discarded.

Motivation: Since the ratio of pieces to squares is so low, to start 
with, this rule will keep more pieces in play longer, for a more 
tactical and longer endgame.

3. No repetition of a previous board position

Motivation: Super-Ko rule is adopted to reduce draws.

Object:

Checkmate or stalemate the opponent

Motivation: Stalemating the opponent is included as a winning condition 
to reduce draws.

Notation:

R        a1        x           a5  	         [a8]
piece	source   capture    destination    drop location

piece: name of the piece
source: starting square
capture: x if capture occured, - if non-capturing move.
destination: ending square
drop location: the location to which the captured piece is dropped

Can be abbreviated if no ambiguity arises.

Remember, if capture occurs, drop location must be specified.


Comments:

Shortest fool's mate is 2.5 moves, which is comparable to FIDE, 
with the added benefit of being more 'foolish'.

Tempo is most important in this game. Losing tempo can be fatal. 
It is even more important than safety of specific pieces. Since 
pieces are recycled.

I have done some playtesting but I would welcome more. And any
more suggestions!

A possible pair of leapers:

Long leaper: same as in this variant except when capturing must jump over
             at least two empty squares before the captured piece.

Short leaper: moves as an Orthodox Queen and captures by overtaking. 
              the piece captured must be within two squares of the
              short leaper. It may land any vacant square somewhere 
              beyond it. It may jumpover friendly pieces, but not 
              capture them. It captures any enemy piece(s) lept over.
              The adjacent square that it lept over must be occupied.
              It may not make more than one short leap in a turn. It 
              may end its move on an edge square only when that is the 
              only way to make a particular capture.

Nice concept and very cleanly explained, however the example might be
flawed, since e1-d2 should be illeagal for it moves white king into
check, because the black king has the backing of a queen so it can
move as a queen and take take the white king in the next move. a
black bishop instead of queen would work.

Sometimes a random search can come up with amazing things, I was
searching for some material for an variant of mine when I came across
this item. It is very well illustrated and strait forward and provides
a good blueprint for how intergrid peice should work. very nice work
indeed.