Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

NIHISCI. No Idea How I Should Call It. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

💡📝Gerd Degens wrote on Mon, Apr 1 01:01 PM UTC:

The page seems to be ready for review.

Bn Em wrote on Wed, Jun 5 03:31 PM UTC:

This looks to have something of the flavour of Upside‐Down Chess, if slightly less explosive on account of the thick pawn wall. Though seems to me white might have a noticeable advantage with 1. e2=Amazonrider which can then relavtively quickly raze black's undefended rear(?) pawn line. Not necessarily without a defense but something to be wary of.

Note also that both this game and Snappy Ch. label the Dragon King's diagonal step incorrectly as a Wazir rather than a Ferz

💡📝Gerd Degens wrote on Wed, Jun 5 06:33 PM UTC in reply to Bn Em from 03:31 PM:

Note also that both this game and Snappy Ch. label the Dragon King's diagonal step incorrectly as a Wazir rather than a Ferz

You observed this very carefully; thank you for noticing my lapse. I have of course changed it in both proposals.

Bn Em wrote on Mon, Jun 17 11:44 PM UTC:

I must admit I'm still a bit torn about the name of this one; the acronym is oddly pleasingly pronounceable, but I'm quite wary of this kind of ‘name‐without‐naming’ — it's a bit like starting a conversation with “what shall we talk about” in that it doesn't really provide any information…

The 1. e2 opening seems to have a couple of plausible defenses after all (at least on a slightly‐less‐cursory look) so I won't worry about it too much

H. G. Muller wrote on Tue, Jun 18 07:14 AM UTC in reply to Gerd Degens from Mon Apr 1 01:01 PM:

The comments I made to Snappy Chess also apply here. In fact the games are so similar that they could be considered sub-variants of each other.

💡📝Gerd Degens wrote on Tue, Jun 18 03:04 PM UTC in reply to Bn Em from Mon Jun 17 11:44 PM:

I must admit I'm still a bit torn about the name of this one; the acronym is oddly pleasingly pronounceable, but I'm quite wary of this kind of ‘name‐without‐naming’ —

Please forgive me for saying that your comment is of a rather academic nature. With so many names of published games that have no relation to the game, mine is more likely to have a chance of recognition. You may not like it, but my naming is still original - isn't it ;-)?