The Chess Variant Pages
Custom Search




[ 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

Later Reverse Order Earlier
This item is a game information page
It belongs to categories: Orthodox chess, 
It was last modified on: 2008-11-03
 By (zzo38) A.  Black. Invisible King Chess. Opponent can't see where you moved your king to. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Andreas Kaufmann wrote on 2011-02-11 UTC
Last comment is by me...

andreas wrote on 2011-02-11 UTC
You can play this game using the following ZRF (which I created in 2003): http://www.zillions-of-games.com/cgi-bin/zilligames/submissions.cgi/47043?do=show;id=554 Certainly, Zillions-of-Games will see where your king (Zillions doesn't really support games with hidden information). The computer's king is hidden from human player by making its image transparent (so it is invisible).

(zzo38) A. Black wrote on 2011-01-17 UTC
You are right that is another way. Have it the same as chess with regard to check (so you cannot move into check or stay in check), and no notifications about check. It is variant of the variant.

Larry Smith wrote on 2008-11-05 UTC
The only stumbling block to a totally referee-less game is the potential of King threatening King. But what if the Invisible Kings were allowed the privilege of not attacking one another and could even occupy the same cell?

George Duke wrote on 2008-11-05 UTCGood ★★★★
It appears the Black brothers were aware of Betza's Lag Chess by similarity and mention of Kriegspiel near the end, as my comment back 10 implies. Not to say it is not worthwhile spinoff by CVPage standards.

Larry Smith wrote on 2008-11-05 UTC
Of course, the players do not have to inform the other that their move resulted in a check. Only that they've moved their King to remove this possible check. The attacking player could then suppose that the previous position resulted in a check. And simply making a King move could fool an opponent into thinking that they had made a checking move. And thus draw them into a negative position. Also, players could play on-line. They would send the TXT of each King move in a password-protected ZIP file. At the end of the game, they would then exchange passwords. Allowing each to verify the legality of the game played. And, this could also work in the real-world. Each King move and its turn number is written on a slip of paper and dropped into a container. Which is then checked at the end of the game. This would still mean that a record of play needs to be kept for the entire game.

Rich Hutnik wrote on 2008-11-04 UTC
This game does look like it needs a ref to be able to ref things. And the game should be like chess in every regarding, including the need to move the King if the King is in check. It makes the rules easier on people.

Larry Smith wrote on 2008-11-04 UTC
An interesting variant. Though I am not fond of the idea of allowing the King to move into or remain in check. This could easily be played with a referee. Each player, in addition to the standard field and pieces, would have a field where their individual Kings are setup. These two fields could be hidden by using boxes with the open side facing the appropriate player. If both players have digital cameras, their King moves could be recorded when played. Thus, in conjunction with a written record of the game(sans the King moves), the validity of play could be verified without the need of a referee.

8 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.