[ 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 Fractal Chess. Missing description (2x(8x8), Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]George Duke wrote on 2007-10-22 UTCGood ★★★★Stephane Burkhart, who posts Mapped Chess this week, made the last Comment in his own Fractal Chess from 2006: ''In reading the ECV by Pritchard, I found a similar (but not reducible to game to mine) called 'Sub-Chess' by Chabotaryov in 1988. So I must give him the origine of the concept.'' In turn, Mapped Chess and Fractal Chess have their comparabilities for follow-up Comment. Nowadays only a year later, the prolificists (not referring to Burkhart's 5 games at all of course nor singling any one out) do not simply thank for the information about a related (earlier) form. Not having researched their topic, they increasingly are defensive or annoyed about comparable prior art called to attention. People have been at this for at least 1500 years, and madly for ten years(25 years counting Betza), so Burkhart's is a good reaction, loosely ''How interesting great minds can think alike'' in praise(respect) for the priority. Cleverly here in going from larger to smaller scale a la Fractal, same-side opposite-colour Bishops can end on same colour. ''See the consequences at smaller scale.'' Ingenious and maybe at first opaque in the detail requiring another Comment along with the Mapped one. These CVs in style are not far removed from Ralph Betza and J. P. Neto and David Howe in mixing the abstact with the specific embodiment.