Women World Fischer Random Championship 2019 Next Month in USA

[Nordlandia]

In my opinion i don't see Fischer Random much different from standard chess. In the broad sense FRC is chess without theory. There is many websites online that offer variants that is very difficult to play OTB. One reason is that standard chess is usually always on the agenda in clubs and for vast majority of OTB tournaments. Also to play fairy piece OTB require special pieces, they're available and affordable though.

Examples:

https://pychess-variants.herokuapp.com/

https://greenchess.net/

[Ovyron]

The reason you can't have a chess engine play on the go is that chess engines are programmed one way.

They're programmed to play chess. They can't play most FRC positions because when the King and the Rook are in weird positions and you want to castle that's not a legal chess move.

It's clear a better variant would be one that just gets rid of castling, the problem is that then we're only left with 480 opening positions, so my solution is to add back another 480 where it's just the same ones but black's positions are mirrored. This is such a position:

[d]rnnqkbbr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RBBKQNNR w kq -

There's nothing wrong with this position and all engines that can play chess can play it. Plus, if you get rid of castling now you don't need to have weird rules about the King being between the Rooks and a lot other positions become playable.

[CMCanavessi]

I will not support a tourney that discriminates based on gender.

I'm inclined to think the post was a joke, as I doubt that the poster would have knowledge of such an event that no one else would have. But be that as it may, in what way did you support the FRC championship just held that did NOT discriminate on gender, as far as I know?

Maybe by watching any open tournament that is free for anyone to join, regardless of their genitalia (or self-perception )

[lkaufman]

I will not support a tourney that discriminates based on gender.

I'm inclined to think the post was a joke, as I doubt that the poster would have knowledge of such an event that no one else would have. But be that as it may, in what way did you support the FRC championship just held that did NOT discriminate on gender, as far as I know?

Maybe by watching any open tournament that is free for anyone to join, regardless of their genitalia (or self-perception )

Merely watching an event doesn't qualify as support to me. Support could be financial, or participating in an event, or encouraging others to follow the event by posts.

[Ovyron]

or participating in an event

Which is impossible if they ban you because of your gender

[jp]

The reason you can't have a chess engine play on the go is that chess engines are programmed one way.

They're programmed to play chess. They can't play most FRC positions because when the King and the Rook are in weird positions and you want to castle that's not a legal chess move.

Your argument is circular. It's just like saying "those Millenium bug-affected programs were programmed to deal with the Western Calendar", which is nonsense.

They can't play most positions because they only cater for one initial position, so they've never had to consider what the castling rule is or should be for more initial positions. That's all.


You can of course prefer another castling rule (including no castling), but a no-castling game makes it no longer include the traditional game. Chess960 includes the traditional game and is therefore a generalization of it, not just a variation.

[Ovyron]

They can't play most positions because they only cater for one initial position

What? They can play 2880 positions out of the box, and even more if we have some where sides can castle (if kings and at least a rook are on their original squares) and even more if only one of the sides can castle. And even more if when able to castle with 2 rooks, the King is forbidden to castle with one of them (now I'm pushing it, but expanded shuffle chess delivers on starting positions to play)

So that's more than 3500 starting positions that chess engines can play, yet FRC went with 960 that no chess engine can play until both sides have gotten rid of retarded castling.

[jp]

So that's more than 3500 starting positions that chess engines can play, yet FRC went with 960 that no chess engine can play until both sides have gotten rid of retarded castling.

Your point is that you dislike Chess960. You should just state that. Instead you came up with a totally bogus argument. This reminds me of your statements about "infinite time" analysis, where you came up with bad arguments, then switched arguments, then switched topics, etc.

[Ovyron]

Your point is that you dislike Chess960. You should just state that. Instead you came up with a totally bogus argument.

What bogus argument? "Your argument is bogus" is a fallacy because it can be said about any argument you dislike. See how it looks like when I use your words against you: Your point is that you dislike my argument. You should just state that. You have to state why do you think one of my arguments is bogus, and why, or there's no discussion.

[jp]

What bogus argument? "Your argument is bogus" is a fallacy because it can be said about any argument you dislike. See how it looks like when I use your words against you: Your point is that you dislike my argument. You should just state that. You have to state why do you think one of my arguments is bogus, and why, or there's no discussion.

No, no, no. I've stated many times above what your bogus argument is. Go back and re-read.

Your bogus argument was that what some computer program can or cannot do proves that Chess960 is "not chess".

It's like saying a program that suffers from the Millenium Bug proves that the Western Calendar is fatally flawed. (The calendar could hypothetically be fatally flawed, but the Millenium Bug does not prove it. It does not even suggest it.)