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

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
George Duke wrote on Sun, Aug 10, 2008 07:30 PM UTC:
This popular thread from 1996 falls off in Comments during 2008. It's self-evident that the board's too small. Shogi outsizes 64 with 81, and Xiangqi dwarfs 64 with 90 spaces. Only so much can be done on 64 squares that has not been done already. Yet 64 trucks on in international competition like the archaism or the addictions it is. Sure it's neatly hexadecimal times 4 (2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2), but so what? 64 squares have simply outlived their usefulness. Its only use anymore, other than paramount historical interest really, is for early instruction to 6-, 7-, and 8-year-olds first learning the moves. The Biblical 40 days and nights, totalling 80 watches, is the optimum size and still fewer than Shogi and Xiangqi. Now 100 squares is too big because Pawns cannot be made to work right. If you get the size right first, it is possible that almost anything fits. 64 squares are too tucked in and narrow, too squat a size for Pawns most of all. No elbow room, no free rein for Knight either. Knight-a3 or -h3 is hopeless on 64-square board size, but N-j3 within the first 10 moves may make sense sometimes. 64 is practically size 8x6 for Pawns, because poor a- and h-Pawns cannot capture to their outside. All the action gets channelled up files b, c, d, e, f and g. They squeezed an extra 100 years out of 64 squares by standardizing Castling. 80 squares is the new Orthodoxy. Castling is not even necessary on 80 spaces, being the orthodox size now to the cognoscenti, but most prefer keeping castling there and even enlarging the possible squares King can move in his castle maneuvre with the Rook.

Edit Form

Comment on the page Chess

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.