Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
The army from this game could be useful in a group of Chess with Different Slightly-Weaker-Than-FIDE Armies. What is the literal meaning of Berse? If it is something suitable I may use the name Berse to replace the apparently unpopular Chatelaine in my piece article Constitutional Characters (http://www.chessvariants.com/piececlopedia.dir/constitutional-characters.html)
See a compilation of those wonderful Mongolian Shatar sets on : http://www.chez.com/cazaux/shatar.htm
Hi, just wanted to let you know you can find traditional Mongolian chess sets for sale at: http://www.AncientChess.com
Recently I came across some shatar problem literature, a couple of collections of what seem to be checkmate problems, but they differ in some respects from international chess checkmate problems so that I wonder either if we have a complete understanding of Mongolian checkmate rules or of aesthetic conventions that may be dear to Mongolians in their chess play. In not a few of the examples in these collections the solutions proposed are not the most efficient (sometimes the diagram has an immediate checkmate by our conventions but that does not use all the material on the board), involve the pieces gaining the checkmate from the initial position moving only once, and seem all to end with checkmate being delivered by a pawn. I wonder if there is in addition to the prohibition of delivering immediate checkmate by pawn a superior win condition because checkmate is delivered finally by a pawn after a series of checks (maybe extra stakes if a bet had been placed on the game?). I wonder also if there is a prohibition on repeated or multiple checks by the same piece. I know of no authentic shatar game scores on which to conjecture an opinion. My inferences are based only on the diagrams and solutions to be read in these Mongolian texts; I am completely sure that a chess master composing a book of problems must not fail to see an immediate checkmate that someone like me could recognize. And yet, I cannot read Mongolian so as to understand the description of the conventions and goals of such problem literature as he may have seen fit to record. I hope that a Mongolian shatar player could enlighten me. As to identifying the historical source for chess among the Mongolians, I wonder if this inference about pawn-delivered checkmate as a flourish of good chess play would be another datum pointing to a Persian-Arab ancestor rather than one directly from India.
The Pawn (Chu) does not have a double initial step, with the exception of the pawn before the queen. The first move pawn as a double initial step is obligatory, but White player would choose the pawn before the queen or king: 1. If White choose the pawn before the queen, Black must also choose the pawn before the queen. 2. If White choose the pawn before the King, Black must also choose the pawn before the King. Please see http://www.nmgqipai.com/mengguxiangqi/mengguzuchuantongtiyu-mengguxiangqi.html
The rules on this page http://www.nmgqipai.com/mengguxiangqi/mengguzuchuantongtiyu-mengguxiangqi.html say that the queen in shatar is the same as FIDE chess. Which is right?
Mr. Ed, I could tell answer. It is called 圖嘿. Recently, I got a Shatar book(259 pages). http://truth.bahamut.com.tw/s01/201204/d4213e2d4bfdda40a1e769bed6bdba49.JPG This book's name is è’™å¤è±¡æ£‹. http://trade.taobao.com/trade/detail/tradeSnap.htm?tradeID=162826843521964 This book was wrote by a passed Mongol man å½æ¥šå…‹æž—é’, and translated to Chinese by his son. å½æ¥šå…‹æž—é’ said some old rules in Shatar. Like 1. Open: There are two kind Open in Shatar. Chahar Style:Two players must do double initial move with the king’s pawn. Ujimqin Style:Two players must do double initial move with the Queen’s pawn. 2. Pomotion: Pawn reaching the last row couldn't promote. But it could move diagonally backward one step. When Pwan reaches the 4st row from the last row, it could only promote to Queen(Called Tiger or Lion). However, player could decide another choice, but he must declare when his Pawn reaches the last row. When Pawn reaches the second row from the last row, it could only promote to åŠèƒ½è™Ž(Half Power Tiger) or called 目車(Eye Chariot). åŠèƒ½è™Ž moves like Dragon King in Shogi. 3. Victory Point: He also mentioned an old rule called 圖嘿(tuuxÉ™i). I thank tuuxÉ™i is like Komi on Go. Player could make enemy left only two pieces(King and another piece) in the end . Then he must make starting check by Chariot or Queen and consecutive Check before chekmate. Before checkmate, Number of consecutive Check is Number of 圖嘿. If player win by common checkmate like Chess, he only got one 圖嘿. Player usually made enemy left One King and One Pawn for having time to put his pieces to good positions to make consecutive Check. In this book , author å½æ¥šå…‹æž—é’ wrote 100 End for example of 圖嘿. Many 圖嘿 are made end by Pawn's checkmate, few by Camel or Horse.
@Yu Ren Dong: Thank you for this information. I had seen this book advertised and wondered about the content. I wonder if it includes game scores that illustrate the differences of rules, variations, etc. I wonder also if it describes in a more complete fashion the large versions of shatar that I understand are played on 9x9, 10x10, 11x11, 12x12 boards. You were very kind to supply these details.
"I wonder if it includes game scores that illustrate the differences of rules, variations, etc. " Differences of rules are just mentioned in text. He said there are different checkmate rules in different locations of Mongolia, players must discuss to use which rules before starting. For instant , checkmate by Horse or Camel ,or bare-mate is not allowed in some locations. Most pictures are 圖嘿. http://truth.bahamut.com.tw/s01/201204/f55cf005eced18ba4e4d00bbc891aa3f.JPG http://truth.bahamut.com.tw/s01/201204/cc4642f8171262c5934a20bb03de9373.JPG http://truth.bahamut.com.tw/s01/201204/843a6d833bacf8e42a5fade77fd63000.JPG Before checkmated by White Camel, Black was under three consecutive Check. So White got three 圖嘿. There are two records of old rules game in this book. Author played one in one town of Xilin Gol League in 3/12/1983. In this game, pawn reached the 4st row from the last row to promote to FIDE Queen and Author use Camel to checkmate and got five 圖嘿. I have written three 圖嘿 in Chinese Wikipedia. http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%92%99%E5%8F%A4%E8%B1%A1%E6%A3%8B "I wonder also if it describes in a more complete fashion the large versions of shatar that I understand are played on 9x9, 10x10, 11x11, 12x12 boards." Author never mentioned any large variant. I think that Hiashatar may be not appeared in Inner Mongolia. Author lived in Ordos City, Inner Mongolia of China. If you need this book, I would scan all pages of book for gift.
@Yu Ren Dong: Thank you for this additional information. I would feel guilty asking for copies of the whole book (pesky copyright laws and rights to intellectual property, and all that), but I think that your response answers the initial question that I wrote: there are superior forms of victory, and these positions (and the ones that you put on wikipedia) illustrate principles in problems. I had considered that the enlarged forms of shatar might be regional: I had wondered if there production might be related to the activities of Buddhist monasteries. It is wild conjecture on my part to think that Japanese Buddhist monks might have thought up enlarged forms of shogi, and therefore, that Mongolian Buddhist monks might have thought up enlarged forms of shatar.
I see. If you need more information, please ask me. 圖嘿 is like that a skillful cat catched a mouse and played it.
@Yu Ren Dong: In the book that you mention, è’™å¤è±¡æ£‹, would you say that 圖嘿 are a kind of special problem literature, a variation on shatar, or a category of possible win conditions that has gone unnoticed in English-language literature until now? I saw that you made additions to the Chinese wiki page for shatar. I wonder if you might, please, submit to the editors a revision, expansion, or additional page on shatar based on your research. I would greatly appreciate their permitting more data on this interesting regional form of chess. Thanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shatar&oldid=527046805 I did edit.
@Yu Ren Dong: I was reading an article of Ivor Montagu in British Chess of 1958. He mentions that there is an ancient treatise on Mongolian chess in the National Library of Ulaanbaatar. I wonder if that source is cited in the book on Mongolian chess that you quoted in earlier comments or if you know whether that book has been transcribed or translated into other languages. @MatsWinther: I wonder if you have made a ZRF for Mongolian chess like your very nice ZRF for hiashatar. I have to say that scripting some of the checkmate limitations has been a bit of a nightmare for us to attempt. Best wishes!
In Shogi there is a similar rule, that you cannot mate by dropping a pawn. This was quite easy to implement in my Shogi engine, by reversing the result of a detected checkmate when the previous move was a Pawn drop. So it was not treated as illegal, but just losing to do it. (Which is basically the way engines treat exposing your own King to check as well.) It seems that most of the cases described for Shatar could be solved by this method too. The only difference is that it might have to look somewhat further back along the branch, to see if there was a shak.
Thank you, Mr. Müller, for your advice! I must tip my hat to the man of greater ability; I am too dim to script a ZRF for shatar, it seems. I have wondered if any who read these pages who are Mongolian or Tuvinian, or who play shatar with Mongolians or Tuvinians, whether the modification to the horse pieces (wind horses?) in this picture (http://history.chess.free.fr/images/shatar/pozzi/mori-knight-02-tuva-r.jpg) signifies the enhanced horse (i.e., with Amazon power after the first move) that Assia Popova describes. It would be curious to see how a piece so powerful, yet incapable of delivering checkamte, interacts with the other pieces. At least, it seems easier to avoid the draws that obtain under shatar's special rules for checkmate.
RinÄen and Montagu after him mention the old fashioned Mongolian custom of asking whether the opponent was playing his bers bold or cautious (maybe this was the question that the old lama actually was asking S. Cammann before their game?) to signify the choice of the more and less powerful moves for this piece (queen or dragon king). I wonder if any of the readers here have played this game with the shortened camel move (Kisliuk describes it as 1-3 squares). I have the quite unsubstantiated impression that the "bold" camel is slightly more valuable or desirable to retain than our bishop when the bers is played "cautious." I have not tried the shortened camel move against an opponent yet. Thoughts, anyone? I truly would like to know more about the ancient treatise that Montagu mentions is to be found in the Ulaanbaatar National Library. My attempts to discover information elsewhere about it and what it may reveal about the history of this game have been fruitless to date.
Mongolia and China were often at odds in humanity bloody history. Founder Bodlaender put this up 18 1/2 years ago. What inspired a look-see where to put this quote is 5 c. bce Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War'.
(23-25) On the field of battle, the spoken word does carry far enough; hence the institution of Gongs and Drums. Nor can ordinary objects be seen clearly enouigh; hence the institution of Banners and Flags. Gongs and drums, banners and flags, are means whereby the ears and eyes of the host may be focused on one particular point. The host thus forming a single united body, it is impossible either for the brave to advance alone, or for the cowardly to retreat alone. This is the art of handling large masses of men.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.