„No one may discuss new rules without a deep understanding of the old ones.“
@MrQNo said in #31:
> „No one may discuss new rules without a deep understanding of the old ones.“
How deep?
> „No one may discuss new rules without a deep understanding of the old ones.“
How deep?
@Ellis_McPickles said in #29:
> That's not the point of my suggestion. Chess is a completely deterministic game. All the variants I'm aware of are also fully deterministic. I'm suggesting a variant which has probabilistic elements. It would make it a completely different game.
locally deterministic with long term fog. also time controls put a dent in that anyway.
like a chaotic dynamical system is locally deterministic. weather anyone.... it is not just the number of independent factors that make it unpredictable at long term. locally deterministic but exponential expanding. yet with emergent properties. old stuff (20-30 years or more).
> That's not the point of my suggestion. Chess is a completely deterministic game. All the variants I'm aware of are also fully deterministic. I'm suggesting a variant which has probabilistic elements. It would make it a completely different game.
locally deterministic with long term fog. also time controls put a dent in that anyway.
like a chaotic dynamical system is locally deterministic. weather anyone.... it is not just the number of independent factors that make it unpredictable at long term. locally deterministic but exponential expanding. yet with emergent properties. old stuff (20-30 years or more).
I'd change points for stalemate...If you get stalemated you get only 0.25 points instead of 0.5, and your opponent gets 0.75...
DO YOU KNOW HOW F***ING DESPERATE I WAS WHEN I FIRST LEARNED CHESS AND THEN I STALEMATED MY OPPONENT FOR QUEEN-KING VERSUS KING??!!??!!
DO YOU KNOW HOW F***ING DESPERATE I WAS WHEN I FIRST LEARNED CHESS AND THEN I STALEMATED MY OPPONENT FOR QUEEN-KING VERSUS KING??!!??!!
Mogłaby być dodana możliwość trzykrotnego cofnięcia ruchu w jednej partii.
No rule should be added to CHESS ... The Rules have be CODIFIED for HUNDREDS of YEARS ... We can compare Capablanca & Carlsen, Alekhine & Fischer. Kasparov & Botvinnik ALL who played with the same rules of CHESS . We should be grateful for the NOTATION that records all the great games of the PAST & PRESENT CHESS
Maybe we can challenge all players we want like Magnus Carlsen
@Jaiakash said in #37:
> Maybe we can challenge all players we want like Magnus Carlsen
@DrNykterstein
lmao then Carlsen must play a million games per day
> Maybe we can challenge all players we want like Magnus Carlsen
@DrNykterstein
lmao then Carlsen must play a million games per day
@Orwellian-Wiress said in #27:
> Why is everyone downvoting everything? These are just interesting rules people came up with, and could lead to cool new chess variants!
Because the original question is offensive to some chess players. If they are talking about chess variants then they should have worded the original question in a way that expresses that viewpoint.
The point being that some chess players love the game the way it is and would prefer it to stay that way.
I am sure some AI types out there with their computer understanding don't really fully grasp the consequences of solving music.
> Why is everyone downvoting everything? These are just interesting rules people came up with, and could lead to cool new chess variants!
Because the original question is offensive to some chess players. If they are talking about chess variants then they should have worded the original question in a way that expresses that viewpoint.
The point being that some chess players love the game the way it is and would prefer it to stay that way.
I am sure some AI types out there with their computer understanding don't really fully grasp the consequences of solving music.
@ThunderClap said in #36:
> No rule should be added to CHESS ... The Rules have be CODIFIED for HUNDREDS of YEARS ... We can compare Capablanca & Carlsen, Alekhine & Fischer. Kasparov & Botvinnik ALL who played with the same rules of CHESS . We should be grateful for the NOTATION that records all the great games of the PAST & PRESENT CHESS
Really? Fisher never played an official game with the Fisher clock. Chess clocks have only been in used since the late 19th century. The current stalemate rules date from the early 19th century. Castling rules varied until the late 19th century. The rules on when you can claim a draw if no capture or pawn move has happened for a long time changed several times in the 20th century (the Wikipedia page mentions different rules in effect in at least 1928, 1952, 1965, 1984, 1989, 1992 and 2001).
If you think we have been playing with the same rules for hundreds of years, you are very mistaken. We haven't even played with the same rules for the last 10 years! (The fivefold repetition rule dates from 2014). Lichess is older than the newest chess rule.
> No rule should be added to CHESS ... The Rules have be CODIFIED for HUNDREDS of YEARS ... We can compare Capablanca & Carlsen, Alekhine & Fischer. Kasparov & Botvinnik ALL who played with the same rules of CHESS . We should be grateful for the NOTATION that records all the great games of the PAST & PRESENT CHESS
Really? Fisher never played an official game with the Fisher clock. Chess clocks have only been in used since the late 19th century. The current stalemate rules date from the early 19th century. Castling rules varied until the late 19th century. The rules on when you can claim a draw if no capture or pawn move has happened for a long time changed several times in the 20th century (the Wikipedia page mentions different rules in effect in at least 1928, 1952, 1965, 1984, 1989, 1992 and 2001).
If you think we have been playing with the same rules for hundreds of years, you are very mistaken. We haven't even played with the same rules for the last 10 years! (The fivefold repetition rule dates from 2014). Lichess is older than the newest chess rule.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.