Check out Grant Acedrex, our featured variant for April, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

⇩Latest ⇩Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier
Checkless Chess. No piece may cross a square where it gives check. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Ben Reiniger wrote on Sat, Oct 6, 2012 11:33 PM UTC:
Rodrigo, I think the idea is that if after white's move, black's only response will put white in (non-mate) check, then that black move is illegal, so black is in fact in checkmate, and white's move was legal.

Then, what happens if black's only response is to put white in a similar position?  This is the "paradox" that is referenced.

Rodrigo Zanotelli wrote on Sat, Oct 6, 2012 08:20 PM UTC:Good ★★★★
"Keller, in his 10th issue of World Game Review mentions the following paradox: what if, say white checks black, such that blacks only move is to check white, but in that position, whites only move is to check black, and so on and so on."
How this would happen in checkless chess? The rules say that you can only mate the enemy king, not check him. In fact this is the main idea of the variant.

Hotmelt wrote on Mon, Jan 2, 2012 01:58 PM UTC:
How a player will win in this game, if you cant give check?

Lets say white is in turn 10, he cant check the oponent king. 
So, to white be able mate/capture the king in turn 12, black would need to
make changes the board position, by some movement and/or capture on turn
11, and that would then allow white capture king on turn 12. 
But the problem is: A player cant put his king in check, and so in turn 11
black would not be able to make this movement that put his king in check.

Anonymous wrote on Tue, Nov 20, 2007 10:41 PM UTC:Good ★★★★
Sacred King Chess seems like a natural extension of this, and I like it better. Still cool though.

Charles Gilman wrote on Sun, Dec 28, 2003 10:24 AM UTC:Good ★★★★
An interesting analysis of a problem of restricted check generally. There are similar issues in multi-player games with rules about checkmate by multiple armies.

5 comments displayed

⇩Latest ⇩Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.