Enter Your Reply The Comment You're Replying To Greg Strong wrote on Thu, Dec 2, 2004 06:53 PM UTC:Hmmmm... I'm not sure what to make of any of this, but my first reaction is to dis-believe every word of it. You claim it's older than the modern (corrupted) form of 'common' chess, as you call it. Funny how Pritchard's Encyclopedia of Chess Variants (the CV bible) doesn't even mention it. Even if the rules are super-secret, as you claim, surely the existance of such a game would be known to Pritchard. But, rather, you claim that orthodox Chess is actually decended from some super-secret game pioneered by the English monarchy, when it's pretty clear that Chess derived from Chaturanga from India. You say that one of the reasons why Stanley Random Chess has not gained any recognition is because (and I quote): the Simplified SR (Common) Chess community has long resisted the notion that SR Chess is a predecessor that predates the more common and corrupted form of the game. Yup. No disagreement there; I dispute the notion. Edit Form You may not post a new comment, because ItemID Stanley Random does not match any item.