Game Reviews (and other rated comments on Game pages)

I really did mean to get back to Feeble/Weakest Chess and write some more.
Be patient, perhaps I will.

You should say it is neither necessary nor possible to block check.

Your comments on chasing down and retreating show that you have playtested
the Feeble pieces. I know this because I've been there as well.

If I had suggested a Feeble game for those who lack patience, I would have
suggested 'Progressive Feeble Chess'. The idea of small-board feeble chess
would never have occurred to me, and of course any idea I wouldn't have
thought of seems just brilliant to me -- that's human nature.

However, is this the smallest possible feeble chess? Or would it work on a
5x5 board?

Hans,

I am a novice.  Your site gave me just what I need to get started.  
Thank-you for spending time putting the site together!

maybe the adult should read and fully explain to the kid what they need to
know 
i just purchased a $200 chess board and found your explanation veryhelpfull
so i can get the game started with my friends  thanks for you time and work

The rules for English Progressive Chess (ENPR) are not correctly reflected
here.  Part 2 states, 'When a player gives check, he forfeits any remaining
moves in that sequence.  His opponent will then add one more move to this
truncated count.'  The first sentence is right, but the second sentence is
wrong; therefore, the third sentence is irrelevant.

The turn number dictates the possible number of moves.  For example, if
White, on the 9th turn, checks on the 6th move, it is then Black's turn
with ten moves allowable.  The truncation of White's 9th turn is just that,
and nothing more.

Also, the language in Part 3 is misleading.  The opening sentence is a good
rough guide, but doesn't withstand literal scrutiny.  More precisely it
should begin with 'In each turn' rather than 'In each sequence'.  In ENPR
jargon, a sequence is a series of movements with a turn whereby all mobile
units have moved, making it possible for another sequence to commence in
that same turn.  So, in a single turn, some units may move twice while
others move only once or are unmoved (immobilized).  It should further be
noted that a player may move to block friendly units in order to achieve
second sequence moves for prominent pieces.  However, third sequences and
beyond are very rare.

This variant can be easily handicapped by giving the weaker player 
an extra amount of zorkmids at the start. the amount depending on
the deference between the players.

Very interesting game. I hope to try it out soon. The idea that assuming a
capturing posture is in effect part of the movement of a piece is
fascinating. 

A suggestion for a table-set: for a capturing posture, place the piece
slightly over the edge of the square towards which it is oriented. For
orientation of a piece, locate the piece just within the edge of the
square towards which it is oriented.

Regarding Ralph's aspirations to create a Chess variant that feels like
Go, one that is primarily intuitive, that would be great--although I
cannot claim to understand master level Chess thought. Kids play
intuitively, until they get 'spoiled' by reading Chess books! Intuitive
play is definitely more fun. I read that Capablanca played intuitively (I
guess he could get away with it because he was so brilliant), but that was
part of his downfall when he encountered players that studied a great
deal. In fact, part of the appeal of Chess variants is that they keep us
guessing. I have to say, though, that Zillions spoils the fun a little by
making it quite easy to study new games.