Single Comment

Earlier games of this sort are flawed by having an unprotected Pawn on each side. This is true of Carrera's Chess, Bird's Chess, Capablanca's Chess, and Aberg's Capablanca variation. More recent games of this sort have fixed this problem by initially arranging pieces in a way that keeps all Pawns protected. I think it is fair to say that this is an improvement, and any of the more recent games (such as Grotesque Chess, Embassy Chess, and Ladorean Chess) are better than the earlier games. I have not played any of these games extensively enough to say from experience that any is better than any of the others. Based on my understanding of good game design and an examination of the rules of these games, I would venture a guess that Grotesque Chess is the best of the bunch. Bear in mind here that I invented Grotesque Chess and could well be biased toward my own creation. Be that as it may, I had reasons for designing it as I did. The main thing about Grotesque Chess that I consider an improvement is its more flexible castling rule. I think this is more suitable for a board this size, and unlike the similar castling rule in Aberg's variation, it stops short of being the equivalent of two moves. I also think that moving the Knights closer to the center may make them more useful, given the greater width of this board. Ladorean Chess has the same castling rule and the same initial position of Knights. I created this game too, at one time considering it as the form Grotesque Chess would take, but discarded it in favor of the form Grotesque Chess did take. I favored the form I gave to Grotesque Chess, because it more symmetrically arranged pieces with Bishop moves.