Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Derek Nalls wrote on Sat, May 3, 2008 05:20 PM UTC:
re:  Muller's assessment of 5 methods of deriving material values for CRC pieces

'I am not sure how much of the agreement between (3) and (4) can be
ascribed to the playtesting, and how much to the theoretical arguments
...'

As much playtesting as possible.  Unfortunately, that amount is deficient
by my standards (and yours).  I have tried to compensate for marginal
quantity with high quality via long time controls.  You use a converse
approach with opposite emphasis.  Given enough years (working with 
only one server), this quantity of well-played games may eventually 
become adequate.

' ... and it is not clear how well the theoretical arguments are able to
PREdict piece values rather than POSTdict them.'

You have pinpointed my greatest disappointment and frustration thusfar
with my ongoing work.  To date, my theoretical model has not made 
any impressive predictions verified by playtesting.  To the contrary,
it has been revised, expanded and complicated many times upon 
discovery that it was grossly in error or out of conformity with reality.

Although the foundations of the theoretical model are built upon 
arithmetic and geometry to the greatest extent possible with verifiable 
phenomena important to material values of pieces used logically for 
refinements, mathematical modelling can be misused to postulate and 
describe in detail the existence of almost any imaginable non-existent 
phenomena.  For example, the Ptolemy model of the solar system.

Edit Form
Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.