Kevin Pacey wrote on Sun, Apr 15, 2018 07:29 PM UTC:
Looking just now, the current setup for Champagne Chess possibly has a defect that's at least a minor one, in that by developing a bishop to the square just in front of a king, one or both sides can put pressure on the enemy king's rook pawn on the second rank, if their queen is still on its original square. Defending by developing the king's knight towards the centre on the third rank is not quite reassuring enough to me, as the enemy's other bishop might be able to quickly take that knight from its original square. The only satisfactory response to a queen-bishop battery as described may be to push one's king's rook's pawn one square forward, so as to prepare eventual possible kingside castling, which seems a bit annoying from this inventor's point of view, if it's to always be the one and only routine response.
[edit: 16 April 2018: even after an l-pawn moves forward one square, an opponent could send his B to where the l-pawn was, after trading off a defending N (if the only defender aside from the R), which just might prove a major bother in a not infrequent number of cases perhaps, as not castling kingside might prove unpalatable - a serious defect for this variant idea enough I'm now inclined to reject it]
To be fair, a bishop seems modestly deployed otherwise when developed to the second rank just in front of the king [edit: all this assumes the opening phase has not been one where the j-pawn has been pushed two squares somehow by the otherwise l-pawn-defending side, though this might not happen very frequently in a well played opening].
[edit2: 27 Oct 2018: I've gone back and added a backup setup to my original post on my Champagne Chess variant idea, which may now be okay as a result, at least if Wide Chess-style castling rules are used, as stated there.]
Looking just now, the current setup for Champagne Chess possibly has a defect that's at least a minor one, in that by developing a bishop to the square just in front of a king, one or both sides can put pressure on the enemy king's rook pawn on the second rank, if their queen is still on its original square. Defending by developing the king's knight towards the centre on the third rank is not quite reassuring enough to me, as the enemy's other bishop might be able to quickly take that knight from its original square. The only satisfactory response to a queen-bishop battery as described may be to push one's king's rook's pawn one square forward, so as to prepare eventual possible kingside castling, which seems a bit annoying from this inventor's point of view, if it's to always be the one and only routine response.
[edit: 16 April 2018: even after an l-pawn moves forward one square, an opponent could send his B to where the l-pawn was, after trading off a defending N (if the only defender aside from the R), which just might prove a major bother in a not infrequent number of cases perhaps, as not castling kingside might prove unpalatable - a serious defect for this variant idea enough I'm now inclined to reject it]
To be fair, a bishop seems modestly deployed otherwise when developed to the second rank just in front of the king [edit: all this assumes the opening phase has not been one where the j-pawn has been pushed two squares somehow by the otherwise l-pawn-defending side, though this might not happen very frequently in a well played opening].
[edit2: 27 Oct 2018: I've gone back and added a backup setup to my original post on my Champagne Chess variant idea, which may now be okay as a result, at least if Wide Chess-style castling rules are used, as stated there.]