[ 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⇩ Earliest⇧ Carpenter. compound of Knight and Dabbaba.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on 2012-01-30 UTCsorry, i mean it would be good to be added now, but it's ok if that is difficult. Charles Gilman wrote on 2012-01-30 UTC'at the end of the page you could just have written something like ..' Not before October 2008 I couldn't have, as I had never heard of the usage until then, and by then I would have had to wait for an editor to post my update anyway. Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on 2012-01-30 UTCIt doesn't really matter i guess. You don't even have to say this is a problematist piece. It's just the information that is interesting to be recorded, at the end of the page you could just have written something like .. Under the name 'Templar', this piece appeared in a problem composition of Bernd Schwarzkopf, published in the German magazine 'Problemkiste', No.23, 12/1984 (see 'http://www.softdecc.com/pdb/search.pdb?expression=PROBID='P1112855'' and 'http://www.softdecc.com/pdb/piecedef.pdb?id=M0000209'). I'm starting to think i like the name 'Whatever' for this piece anyway, lol. Anonymous wrote on 2012-01-29 UTC'I am reluctant to inundate the editors with more updates'. And the people rejoiced. Charles Gilman wrote on 2012-01-29 UTCTo put this into context: This page was posted in 2005, when no-one was coming forward with the Templar-Hospitaller pairing. All I knew was that Timothy Newton had given Outback Chess the piece Kangaroo=Knight+Elephant and I wanted to match it with Knight+Dabbaba. Kangaroo seemed to follow the pattern of Gnu, Gazelle, and Bison but unlike Elephant, Camel, Zebra Dabbaba is not a beast itself so I did not see the need to use a beast name. What I did want was to pick a name equally easy to extrapolate. By the time I posted the two pages I had found the old Doughnut reference but no-one was presenting me with any evidence of other names for either piece. What criticisms were made at the time of posting I addressed - by adding more weight to the older Doughnut usage and switching from 'co-inventors' to 'inventor unspecified'. I also named Camel+Dabbaba Casbah and Camel+Elephant Caribou but did not consider them ready for ther own pages. Mention on the site of Templar as a name for this piece, and Hospitaller for the Outback Chess Kangaroo, has been made only since my editorship lapsed, so any further changes that I made to the pages would have to be submitted to, and posted by, a current editor. Since the introduction of post-your-own (PYO) my personal experience has been that editors are inactive in posting corrected submissions of pre-PYO pages. If I thought that it would do any good I would add in the problematist usages with an emphasis that that is what they are and submit it, but my own priorities are updates that I have already submitted for my own pre-PYO variants in light of changes to piece names. Until these are addressed I am reluctant to inundate the editors with more updates. Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on 2012-01-27 UTCThank you for this wonderful information, 1984! We do know that this piece is called 'Templar', it is been said in this thread also. Sadly, Charles Gilman has a thing about 'problematist's' names for pieces. Charles likes pieces that have played in a game. Charles, you should add the info that Alfred has given here on this page, at least, it is good to have this information there. Alfred Pfeiffer wrote on 2012-01-27 UTCThis piece occured already as fairy chess piece 'Templar' in a problem composition of Bernd Schwarzkopf, published in the German magazine 'Problemkiste', No.23, 12/1984 (see 'http://www.softdecc.com/pdb/search.pdb?expression=PROBID='P1112855'' and 'http://www.softdecc.com/pdb/piecedef.pdb?id=M0000209'). Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on 2012-01-21 UTCthanks Jörg Knappen wrote on 2012-01-21 UTCAs far as I can see, the name 'vicount' (without an s) is indeed Peter Aronson's invention. The piece itself is absent from Derzhanski's list ( http://www.chessvariants.org/piececlopedia.dir/whos-who-on-8x8.html ) and from TÃ¶ws' Generic chess piiece creation system ( http://www.chessvariants.org/unequal.dir/genericchesssystem.html ). I recommend a look into the latter for some other names for rarely used pieces like Boxer (Commoner + Beaver) or Foursquare (FNLJG in Betza notation, L is Camel, J is Antelope, and G is Tripper). Derzhanski's list also gives sources to games, TÃ¶ws obviously draws from similar sources, but does not give them. Charles Gilman wrote on 2012-01-21 UTCI can confirm that Ralph Betza coined Doughnut for Bakery Bombers, mentioned in the summary of the Pancake page. Templar is the problematist usage (though still not listed on the new All the King's men page), but as with so many names it is used differently in variants - in Templar Chess Templar means Ferz+Dabbaba+Elephant. Viscount I cannot recall being used for this piece - my own use of Viscount is for a hex-prism piece, the forward-only version of the Marquis. Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on 2012-01-20 UTCjust needing some info on names for this piece Ralph Betza called it 'Doughnut', is that right? The name 'Vicount' then came from Peter Aronson in a discussion about 'rook level chess', correct? Charles Gilman wrote on 2008-10-26 UTCHaving read the page with the Templar usage on it I have noticed that the usage being described is essentially that used in problems. Are there any actual games featuring this piece under the name Templar? Are they even that common in problems, like Empress for Rook+Knight or Princess for Bishop+Knight (which are common enough to appear in The Oxford Companion to Chess)? If the answer to both is no, standard Piecelopedia practice appears to be to omit such names. Charles Gilman wrote on 2008-10-13 UTCThanks for the link. I'll see what I can do with it. Nuno wrote on 2008-10-12 UTCI forgot to give the link for the page where I saw this names. It is: http://www.ktn.freeuk.com/9a.htm Nuno wrote on 2008-10-12 UTCWell I believe there are some. I'm making a file to myself in Open Office format with the annotations of Ralph Betza about the atoms of pieces (wazir, ferz, etc) and their combinations. And as I go along with this file I'am replacing its funny notation for some names I found on the 'All the King's men' page, as well as here on some variants. And these are may sources basically. For example, The FD (ferz+dabbaba) is called a Duke and also a Diamond by chess problemists. But, and here is the fun part(?), it is called a Kylin (mythological creature) by japonese playeres since the middle ages on its Chu Shogi! Another example is the famous Waffle of Ralph Betza, also appears in Chu Shogi, under the name Phoenix (another mythological creature)! In the west it is called also a Caliph (a very appropriate name I believe..). Charles Gilman wrote on 2008-10-12 UTCThank you for the information on the name Templar, as I had never heard of it so used before. It is not in my usual source for etabnlished British names, All the King's Men, and any attempt tofind a reference on a search ewngine is swamped by novelty sets and references to real-life Templats as players. For this reason I would be grateful to know if you have any sources online so that I cross-reference it. Are there correspomnding names for similar pieces e.g. Knight+Alfil? Nuno wrote on 2008-10-10 UTCI believe this piece is known by another name to British chess variant problemists which is Templar. H. G. Muller wrote on 2008-07-06 UTCOK, I can now do all 3-men EGTBs on 2n x 2n boards upto 16x16. (For odd-sized boards the reflection symmetry works differently. King + Carpenter can almost always perform checkmate on 10x10, but hardly ever on 12x12. H. G. Muller wrote on 2008-07-03 UTCI can confirm that this piece has mating potential on an 8x8 board. My tablebase builder says for the King + Carpenter vs King endgame that it is almost always won if the side with the Carpenter has the move. There are only 196 exceptions to this (out of ~ 250,000 positions) where the Carpenter is under diagonal attack in a corner, and its King is too far away to protect it after it moves. Longest mate against optimal defense is 31 moves. There are 100 such positions, e.g. w:Ka1, Carpenter g7, b:Kf6. I am not sure what the interest of 12x12 boards is. Perhaps I should modify my EGTB generator to handle 16x16 board or even 32x32 boards. The current version can do upto 5 men on 8x8, but with the same memory usage it could still handle 3 men on 32x32. And I can always limit it to a subset of the board. David Howe wrote on 2005-06-25 UTCCharles, To create multiple links to the same page, just view the page in question, and at the bottom/left of the page should be a set of links that look like this: [info]  [link] Click on the rightmost one (ie. [link]). This will being up a form which will allow you to add more links to that page. Let me know if you have any questions. Charles Gilman wrote on 2005-06-25 UTCCarpenter - The piececlopedia has many pieces of recent invention, including the Waffle and Pancake from the same CWDA army. Having researched Doughnut I find that this army has yet to be completed, and have amended the article accordingly. Carpenters had their place in mediaeval society even if, like queens, it was off the battlefield. We shouldn't neglect those behind the scenes - it was someone noticing a carpenter called Harrison Ford that gave cinema a good actor for unconventional action heroes. <p>I am still relatively new to this and making the odd error - but promptly fixing them when notified. Where I gave too little prominence to usages earlier than my own, I now realise the potential of this to give offence and have corrected this faux pas as well. I do not know how to do multiple references in the style of the existing e.g. Chancellor/Marshal pointing to the same page. Advice on how to do them would be a positive and useful contribution. Doug Chatham wrote on 2005-06-24 UTCIs there a way to restrict access so that *only* the Piececlopedia editor (currently Fergus) can post Piececlopedia pages? If that's not possible, then how about an official policy restricting Piececlopedia entries to pieces used in Recognized Chess Variants? Greg Strong wrote on 2005-06-24 UTCThank you, Peter. I was also aware of the Chess with Different Knights origin, but didn't even bother to go into it because I'm just so disgusted that this page was ever posted with this piece name, and with Charles Gilman listed as co-inventor. Whichever editor posted this page needs to slow down and apply more scrutiny, or just not post. This piece was *NOT* invented by Charles Gilman, and this page needs to be removed or at least heavily revised. Right now, almost everything on this website is very responsible and historically acurate, but I fear a slippery slope, when anyone can submit pages like this for the obvious purpose of promoting their own games, naming, or ideas, and can write their submissions in third-person to make it appear like an official judgement. Fergus is exactly right when he explains the problems with these recent Piecelopedia entries, and explains Gilman's rational for doing so. So what is next? If an editor posts something he shouldn't, what happens? Is there some policy by which we can edit/remove it, or is it on this website forever? In the latter case, it is only a matter of time before this website (my personal favorite site on the entire web) is just loaded down with historical innacuracies, and outright garbage. Peter Aronson wrote on 2005-06-24 UTCThe earliest reference to this piece that I am aware of is in Ralph Betza's <a href='../dpieces.dir/diffknights.html'>Augmented [Different] Knights</a>, which is copyright 1994. Ralph, following his own system simply called the piece the ND. <p> This piece also showed up as the Vicount in a discussion of a proposed variant called <a href='../index/listcomments.php?subjectid=Rook-Level+Chess'>Rook Level Chess II</a> in the comment system in April 2002. Ralph Betza was kind enough to provide a mate example for it -- also starting the Black King in a corner (b8). Fergus Duniho wrote on 2005-06-24 UTC<P>Even with the URL fixed, the link to CWDA does not go to a page describing the Doughnut, and although I recently programmed CWDA for Game Courier, I don't remember this piece from any of the armies for this game.</P> <P>Carpenter is an obscure name for this piece. For me, it brings to mind Jesus Christ or Karen Carpenter. If you want the name to combine the ideas of Knight and a War Machine made of wood, some better names would be Trojan Horse, Rocking Horse, or War Horse. I particularly like <A HREF='http://www.answers.com/topic/war-horse'>War Horse</A>.</P> <P>David is right that this piece could mate a King with help from only another King. The checkmated King would have to be in the corner, with the other King covering two of its neighboring squares in the same rank or file, and this piece attacking the King and covering the other neighboring square. The size of the board shouldn't make this any less possible. The main question is whether this piece is strong enough to force the enemy King into the corner with help from only one's own King.</P> 25 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier⇩ Earliest⇧Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.