Single Comment

Horus. Game with Royal Falcons where all pieces start off board and most captures return pieces to owner's hand. (7x7, Cells: 44) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

George Duke wrote on Mon, Apr 12, 2004 04:03 PM UTC:

Coined in 2003 by Ralph Betza (and never used by anyone else)the term 'Lame' is applied to 
Dabbaba, where from e4 it can move to e6 if and only if e5 is empty. 'Lameness' to him makes a 
leaper not a leaper, since it requires unobstructed pathway.
Yet Falcon uniquely has three(3)pathways to each square 3 steps away not reachable by Knight 
or Queen. So neither lameness nor leaping describe Falcon. Aronson goes on: 'One result is that, 
unlike with Lame pieces, if Black's Falcon attacks White's Falcon, White's Falcon also attacks 
Black's Falcon.' [Later I delete here some lines speculating what a 'lame Bison'is. 
Who knows? Aronson refuses to define it; as of April 2004, no one has 
used 'lame' for any oblique mover at all. The uncomplimentary term originates with Aronson. 
He just wants pejorative adjective attached to Falcon, and succeeds to the extent  
others now start calling F 'lame'--after Aronson writes that Falcon is not lame.  
Altogether a worthless, deliberately misleading move description.]
It is not worth delving into these 20-Questions-like what-it-is-not
snapshots of F move.  Just go to original articles, where Falcon defined affirmatively
in terms of Rook, Knight, and Bishop, and those four standards' mutuality
and accompaniments are honestly and systematically related.