Kibbitz Listing Game: Ca Log: lazyking-joejoyce-2005-152-745 Michael Nelson wrote on 2005-07-04Is it possible that the preset doesn't handle double check correctly? Could this also be a problem in other presets? Black could counter the Unicorn check or the Lion check, but not both at once as this requires a move of the Queen and he has none.Game: Pocket Mutation Chess Log: rlavieri2003-antoinefourriere-2005-67-759 Michael Nelson wrote on 2005-04-18A most interesting game. Value classes 7 & 8 are not essential to game play as they will so seldom occur, but neither do they harm gameplay and they make the piece set logically complete. As for the SuperCardinal, it is the strongest vc5 piece in terms of mobility calculated a la Betza, but is weaker than any vc6 piece. Look at it this way. A Rook is one atom stronger than a Bishop: we add a 'super' move to each and a SuperRook is one atom stronger than a SuperBishop (perhaps the gap narrows a bit as the super move removes colorbinding for the Bishop). Now if a Chancellor is one atom stronger than a Cardinal adding the super move to each should likewise leave the SuperChancellor one atom stronger than the SuperCardinal. By the way, the SuperCardinal can push the King around quite nicely, but the SuperChancellor can mate unassisted. Game: Rococo Log: crazytom-lazyking-2005-67-764 Michael Nelson wrote on 2005-04-11Thomas, I believe your interpretation of the rules as written is the correct one, since it can't be the inventors' intent to create a paradox and the rules as written do so, as I myself pointed out. Therefor your move is 100% legal. However, I would urge you to retract your move: The competant authority has ruled it illegal, albeit incorrectly in our shared view. Said competant authority is neither Peter nor David, but Fergus, who is in charge of both Game Courier itself and this particular tournament, thus he has the authority to make this determination. The fact that he made his decision based on Peter's and David's is interesting but irrelevant to the legal issue. I have no experience in directing Chess/CV games but have extensive experience as a club level Bridge director. The laws of both games (and virtually all other games) are the same on this point--the director's decision is to be followed, even when it is wrong. You might indicate that your are retracting the move under protest and inquire about what your appeal rights (if any) may be if you do not win this game.Game: Fugue Log: mikenels-rlavieri2003-2004-352-393 Michael Nelson wrote on 2005-01-03Roberto, you played a fine game and I'm rather surprised at the outcome (though pleased!) Thank you ofr a good game. In retrospect, the opening error proved decisive. The loss of two pawns was made up, but his position became very cramped. Ironically in view of our last game, Roberto might have done better allowing the exchange of my Pushme-Pullyu for his Shield. It is an open question how much material advantage I would have gained. My own belief is the it pays to trade a Queen or PP for a Shield or Immobilizer if you have adequate offense without the piece, but not if it leaves you on the defensive. The game showed off the Archer and the technique of seting up spotters for long shots. Also of note was a horrific threat from my Swapper, properly countered--a mistake here would have ended the game then and there. My hope is that these games will show Fugue as an excellent, deep game in its own right--neither Ultima nor Rococco but a third thing with a beauty and grace all its own.Game: Fugue Log: rlavieri2003-cvgameroom-2004-318-638 Michael Nelson wrote on 2004-11-27Roberto is putting up a most impressive defense, especially for a variant that is new for him. This is shaping up to be an excellent game. If I can break through his strong defense I expect to win--if not, the Ultima Gods help me when his counterattack comes. This game shows the power of the Shield quite clearly. It's a vital piece in the opening and middlegame, but not that useful in the endgame: King and Shield can't mate lone King and loses vs. King and any non-shield piece--sooner or later King and Shield have to separate or lose by triple repetition. King and Immobilizer vs. King and Shield is a particularly easy win as it doesn't require the King an Shield to separate--immobilize them both and win by stalemate. Yet averaged over the game, the Shield is almost as strong as the Immobilizer--probably stronger in the opening. Notice also how a purely defensive piece enhances attack. My Pushme-Pullyu is exerting terrific pressure on Roberto's positon with impunity, as it is uncapturable while next to the Shield. Michael Nelson wrote on 2004-11-23OOPS, not check as Roberto's King is shileded. Still a good move picking off the pawn, though.Game: Cavalier Chess Log: mikenels-penswift-2004-264-067 Michael Nelson wrote on 2004-11-03The rules description on the Game Courier page needs to be changed. It states that the Cavalier moves one space <i>forward</i> and then one diagonally. I played the game assuming this was the rule--my fault for not checking the full rules page which gives the Cavalier's move as one square <i>orthogonal</i> followed by one square diagonal.Game: Pocket Mutation Chess Log: crazytom-fergus-2004-173-164 Michael Nelson wrote on 2004-07-14Well played on both sides! Black's 13th move is the key--mutating the Queen and allowing the fork but creating the devastating counterattack. The most brilliant Pocket Mutation move I've seen. If Black doesn't find this move, or there is any error in his followup, White is playing more than well enough to win--he will promote the Nightrider and continue to extend his advantage. Congratutulations to Fergus for a fine win and to Thomas for a excellently played effort that could have easily gone the other way.Game: Pocket Mutation Chess Log: mikenels-ben_good-2004-173-164 Michael Nelson wrote on 2004-07-02I played this game wide open, disregarding my own advice about using the pocket sparingly. If the attack hadn't come off, I would have been in a disadvantaged position and might well have lost. Ben already had gained a small material advantage and a failed attack would have given him the opportunity to gain more. You will probably never see an AmazonRider in Pocket Mutation, but in games with a more conservative opening, a wider variety of pieces will appear. Above Queen strength pieces are not common but do make appearances from time to time. The good variety of Queen value pieces often come into play in the later middlegame, but the real meat of Pcoket Mutation's expanded piece set are the SuperBishop, NightRider, SuperRook, and Cardinal. Sometimes a timely mutation of a Knight into a Bishop or vice versa or the promotion of Bishop to Rook is the key to a victory. This game has tremendous variety.Game: Wizard's War Log: tony_quintanilla-mikenels-2003-290-241 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-12-16Critical indeed. Tony is threatening to win by clearing the arena. His use of his superior number of pieces to keep my two Amazons out of the arena is quite instructive. If I can simplfy the position down to one Amazon for me in addition to Rook-Wizards and Rooks for both sides, I can probably win. If I can't, Tony will likely have a winning head start in the coming 'Rook War'.Game: Magic Chess Log: fergus-duniho-2003-334-771 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-12-12Perhaps the problem is that spells may not be used to achive checkmate, but may be used to escape checkmate. Two alternatives to playtest: 1. Checkmate may be given by spells. 2. Spells may not be used to escape checkmate. (Spells may be used to escape a check which could have been escaped by a normal move.)Game: Pocket Polypiece Chess Log: antoinefourriere-cvgameroom-2003-329-376 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-12-08Very good game you two have going. A rules point you should clarify before it becomes applicable: does promoting a pawn induce flipping? I would say no, as the promotion is a Pawn move, not a move of the resultant polypiece. Game: Pocket Mutation Chess Log: mikenels-AntoineFourriere-2003-308-679 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-11-14I made a bad mistake on move 8, but might well have escaped with a draw against a lesser opponent. Please observe Antoine's excellent technique in bringing the win home. I found the wall of pawns around his Queen most annoying:he was to well protected against a Knight drop that might have allowed me some counterplay. His aggressive attacks on the back rank looking for promotions kept my Queen pinned down defending it--this is really a Rook's job. An excellent exploitation of superior matierial and mobility for an irresistable breakthrough. Well played indeed!Game: Wizard's War Log: tony_quintanilla-mikenels-2003-290-241 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-11-11I like Fergus' thinking on this issue.Game: Pocket Mutation Chess Log: peteraronson-antoinefourriere-2003-282-265 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-11-11The final mating combination is Pocket Mutation at its finest. Got to love the discovered checkmate. A fine illustration of the awesome power of the Nightrider in the opning/early middlegame. Antoine and Peter have done much to advance opening theory for Pocket Mutation. I have come to appreciate how terrifying a Rook on its intial square is--the Nightrider mutation is always lurking in the background.Game: Wizard's War Log: tony_quintanilla-mikenels-2003-290-241 Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-11-11Antoine is correct. Black's 16 move is illegal, as piece creation is not optional in Wizard's War. Sorry about that, Tony (and your were asking me about letting you know if you made an illegal move!) As to whether kibbitzers should comment on illegal moves, I think we should develop some consensus on this as soon as possible. I can see both sides of this, but tend towrds being in favor of it--better to waste three moves than a whole game. Over the board chess is not a valid analogy, as kibbitzers there are barred from any comment about anything.