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 ]

Rated Comments 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: 2008-08-14
 By Larry L. Smith. Mad Queen Shogi. Missing description (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
George Duke wrote on 2008-08-14 UTCPoor ★
Such noblesse oblige as ''I am well aware'' does not apply to newcomers who would like to understand reasonable guidelines for the hobby of off-Chesses. Is Smith seriously defending this bunko Mad Queen Shogi? Why not maturely thank or apologize for omitting Chessgi reference? Why not use one sentence to place rules in context drawing on 200 years of similar forms, as example for readers? Smith started ten years ago with nice analysis of historic Jetan, a rewrite of it appearing this week; and none of his own artistic rules-sets since have attained the competence of ''Jetan'' -- by Burroughs or by Smith. Forget that there are so many untried alternatives, including for example Problems after T.R. Dawson or Sam Loyd. Or fiction after Bill Wall's collection of hundreds of Chess-related poems, novels, films. Or critiques of others' contributions like Smith does with Burroughs, or done in Comments by myself, Gilman, and others. Or summaries of related historic forms like Jose Carillo does nowadays with such as 8x10 Chesses from Carrera to date. Another unoriginal Rules-set, oh great, number 3001, and by veteran Larry Smith. It just encourages mediocrity. Who waste people's time, how about or when will there be moratorium, considering that new ones differentiate less and less from prior ones, at least in instances like MQS? How many ways and times does it have to be expressed that many sincere appreciators of novel Chesses simply reject the particular prolificist ethos? It is their extremism, not ours, to diverge from 1500 years of rare and cautious development of new alternate-Chess set-ups, out of respect for past existing ones. Not alone, Mad Queen Shogi is not worth the aether it is printed on.

George Duke wrote on 2008-08-14 UTCPoor ★
Bodlaender's Chessgi article shows Chessgi is invented many times since 1827. [Incidentally Alexandre invented what we call FRC today in 1820's also. 1820's were the very high point of activity for the Turk throughout Europe and North America under Maelzel. Alexandre authored 'Encyclopedie des Echecs' and introduced algebraic notation including castling O-O and O-O-O. ] Drop, Mad Mate, Reinforcement, Turnabout, Schizo, and Neo-Chess are all examples in the class of derivatives and copycats of what is known as Chessgi from Betza's renaming. Moreover here ''Players could opt...'' and ''Players can decide'' in the short write-up of Larry Smith are unpresentable. Joe Joyce's famous ''not worth the aether they're printed on'' goes for Mad Queen Shogi. How about hapless paragraph two of Smith ''...the first player being the one with the King to the right of the Queen''?

2 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.