[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Single Comment Grander Chess. A variant of Christian Freeling's Grand Chess. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Joe Joyce wrote on 2006-02-28 UTCOkay, Gary, I was trying to be nice and let him down easy. A. O. Myers does a discussion of Grander Chess (first item under See Also) in which he disagrees with K. Scanlon's elimination of en passant and treatment of stalemate, but agrees with the new piece placement. Now, I also think en passant should stay. And if there is a problem with stalemate, then give the stalemater 2/3 of a point and the stalematee 1/3. That satisfies my sense of what feels right. I'd even take a little issue with piece placement, as the knights are, in both variants, pushed farther away from the middle, thus weakening them somewhat, but I don't see an alternative that's better or even as good as the current knight placement. (Obviously I use the same setup in GS.) Finally, I don't believe the name is justified. Fergus makes excellent points and sense in his comments. Mr. Scanlon tried, but the group consensus is that he obviously did not succeed. What he did, at most, was create a modest variant of Grand Chess with a most immodest name. Of course, that puts many of us, perhaps me especially, at risk for our games' names.