< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 51 OF 51 ·
|Feb-14-18|| ||zanzibar: <<chessgames>|
Like the author/maintainer of chess.js said, if there was sufficient interest he would merge the FRC code back into chess.js. I believe that's the best shot at making it work
Agreed it's the best solution, but we still face the problem of games with "legal" illegal moves.
<So the new terminology is "a-side castling" and "h-side castling".>
I don't see any additional functionally for the cost since Q-side = "a-side", K-side = "h-side". Maybe I'm missing something.
* * * * *
I was thinking we need to extend the PGN standard to formalize/accommodate things like Fischer960, and especially "legal" illegals moves (I see a practical need for that as a big priority to accurately reflect classical play).
I like doing the low level stuff a lot, and actually did some for SCID. Even bitboards for my FEN program. But I understand wanting to rely on an underlying framework/library.
Still, Olga could be a stand-alone piece of code - the kernel must not be that much work (cf my FEN program).
As for LISP - yeah, we've all been forced to write Emacs elisp programs. But when I dream at night, it's in Emacs Python.
|Feb-14-18|| ||drleper: <chessgames.com: Another small issue is that if you examine the PGN from the recent tournament, the FEN is highly irregular, notably with the designation of kingside/queenside castling. For example, if the rooks started in their normal positions, the initial FEN would not end in "w KQkq -" but rather in "w HAha -". (Because you see, as Fischer himself pointed out, it's no longer appropriate to call it "kingside and queenside" since the king might start on the left and the queen might start on the right.) So the new terminology is "a-side castling" and "h-side castling". To make matters worse they change the letters depending on where the rooks start out (I noticed a "DAda" and a "GBgb" as well.) There's no reason we can't keep K and Q and just understand that for historical reasons we regard the K symbol to mean "white's right hand side" and so forth.>|
You're right, but there are certain cases where FEN falls over with chess960 (see the example here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-FEN...). X-FEN was developed to be backwards compatible with FEN, and therefore regular FEN is all that is needed to describe any chess960 game starting position (and the majority of in-game positions too). The special X-FEN cases are required when there is some ambiguity about which rook is the castling rook. If you're interested, you can read more about it here https://chess960.net/start-positions/
If you check the PGN of the 960WCC that I prepared https://chess960.net/2018/02/960wcc... you can see that regular FEN has been used. The PGN opens fine in ChessX, which only uses X-FEN when it's explicitly required. There is also the Shredder-FEN approach, and it might be the case that Chessbase programs are applying the S-FEN notation to chess960 PGNs at all times (even when it's not strictly necessary). All up, this probably means extra programming work since PGNs of either type could be encountered.
|Feb-14-18|| ||zanzibar: In 960 the king goes between the two rooks - so there's always a Q-side/K-side designation inherited from classical chess. It also shows up in the K+R position immediately after castling, rather blatantly.|
The reason for the redundant new-terminology is only because the queen's initial square can be either K-side or Q-side, and I guess people just wanted to be pedantic.
I would have preferred right/left-castling terminology myself, that is, if I was in a pedantic mode.
|Feb-14-18|| ||drleper: <zanzibar: The reason for the redundant new-terminology is only because the queen's initial square can be either K-side or Q-side, and I guess people just wanted to be pedantic.>|
The FEN extensions were created for those special cases where you can't tell which rook is the castling rook (something that can only happen during a game, never from the start). In my experience those positions don't come up too often, so yeah, it makes sense to just stick with FEN and only apply X-FEN/S-FEN when it's actually necessary.
|Feb-14-18|| ||zanzibar: <<drleper> The FEN extensions were created for those special cases where you can't tell which rook is the castling rook (something that can only happen during a game, never from the start).>|
Ah, I see - this for FEN after the game has begun, say when one rook moves back to the 1st rank on the other side of the king. Then the FEN loses the info of which rook moved and which didn't.
However, the only legal castling would be with the nearest rook, as the unoccupied square rule still applies.
Am I missing something still?
|Feb-15-18|| ||zanzibar: OK, I think I was missing something - now that I've thought a little more on the subject.|
And yes, 960 has the problem and classic doesn't.
You can use the normal FEN to forget previous moves in a recorded 960 game - since you can assume the remaining moves are all legal.
But you can't use a FEN to set up a 960 game to play in a forward sense, at least in the most general case. You would need an XFEN as <drleper> said.
|Feb-15-18|| ||Monocle: <Absentee: The pieces are as uncoordinated as they are in the classical starting setup, the difference is that you're used to it.>|
That's simply not true.
|Feb-15-18|| ||drleper: <zanzibar: However, the only legal castling would be with the nearest rook, as the unoccupied square rule still applies.>|
Remember though that FEN doesn't say whether castling immediately is a valid move or not, but only if castling rights exist. Those rights can still exist even when there are pieces in the way. For chess960, two rooks on the same side as the king can cause a problem if castling rights are still available on that side (how to know which rook is the castling rook, and which one moved over there during play?).
<zanzibar: You can use the normal FEN to forget previous moves in a recorded 960 game - since you can assume the remaining moves are all legal.
But you can't use a FEN to set up a 960 game to play in a forward sense, at least in the most general case. You would need an XFEN as <drleper> said.>
I'm not too sure what you mean here, but in the majority of cases normal FEN is sufficient to fully describe a chess960 position (including all 960 starting positions). X-FEN is only required in those special rook cases described above. Just a guess, but perhaps S-FEN is being used by Chessbase programs all the time to just simplify the whole situation (even at the starting position, where it's technically not required).
|Feb-15-18|| ||morfishine: Standard setup is symmetrical. Chess960 setup is almost always asymmetrical (though the same pieces still must be opposite each other). However, it is possible with the random setup that the standard setup results! A minimum # of rules guide the 960 setup, for example, each side must have a DSB & LSB (ie: pure random setup could result in 2 LSB's or 2 DSB's). |
Players are forced to rely on their talent and creativity (instead of rote memorization of opening lines)
|Feb-15-18|| ||Absentee: <Monocle: <Absentee: The pieces are as uncoordinated as they are in the classical starting setup, the difference is that you're used to it.>|
That's simply not true.>
|Feb-15-18|| ||alexmagnus: <Players are forced to rely on their talent and creativity (instead of rote memorization of opening lines)>|
If 960 becomes the standard, this "advantage" will quickly go away and players will memorize 960 theory. It's 960 times more? So what? Modern theory grew by more than that in the last century - think of it, in Nimzo'a times they could cause controversy by playing a novelty on move 3.
Also note that most games in MC vs Naka were not decided in the opening but in the endgame. The role of the opening is overrated by players and spectators alike
|Feb-15-18|| ||Monocle: <Absentee: <Monocle: <Absentee: The pieces are as uncoordinated as they are in the classical starting setup, the difference is that you're used to it.>|
That's simply not true.>
Since when is piece coordination determined by how familiar you are with the position?
|Feb-15-18|| ||morfishine: <alexmagnus> The standard setup is one of the 960 possible initial setups. Similar themes still exist between standard & 960, for example, controlling the center with pawns and smooth/quick development. Personally, I have a lot of fun playing Chess960|
|Feb-15-18|| ||zanzibar: <drleper> Yes, it seems rather clear by the light of day that 960 needs XFEN or SFEN for castling under certain circumstances.|
But regular FEN can be used to truncate any 960 game's movelist beginning, as I said last night. The assumption is that all the subsequent moves are legal. It's not a big issue, and doesn't have much functionality, so no need to belabor it.
For people wondering about the difference between S-FEN/X-FEN/FEN castling rights - I think this page is useful:
Anyways, thanks for setting me straight on the issue.
|Feb-16-18|| ||drleper: <zanzibar> Seems like a misunderstanding, no worries. There doesn't appear to be much discussion about S-FEN online for some reason, but I only have experience with ChessX which is using X-FEN.|
|Feb-16-18|| ||Joshka: To really mix things up, why not have players play with different positions, and have them pulled at random!! Say Player A will be using position 49, Player B will be using 251!! Also, they only get to know the starting position one minute before game time!!!|
|Feb-16-18|| ||Spectator123: ... and let them play blindfolded, also when shown starting position! :-)|
|Feb-16-18|| ||beenthere240: How about they play blindfolded WITHOUT being shown the starting position? The arbiter would tell them if a check had occurred, a piece had been taken, or if a move was illegal.|
|Feb-16-18|| ||alfamikewhiskey: Of the possible positions, RKNNBBRQ is the "oddest" imo.|
|Feb-18-18|| ||casaschi: @chessgames.com contrary to the earlier statement in this forum, pgn4web supports chess960 as you can see in this demo: http://pgn4web.casaschi.net/chess96...|
|Feb-18-18|| ||savagerules: In Game 11 of Naka-Carlsen the first move was 1. 0-0 0-0. Both castled on the first move! At any rate I think this match was more interesting than a bunch of Berlins or Guioco Pianos or something.|
|Feb-19-18|| ||morfishine: I'm Black
click for larger view
1. e4 e5 2. f3 Nb6 3. d4 f6 4. d5 Nf7 5. Nb3 d6 6. Be3 h6 7. Qb5 Ng5 8. Nf2 Bf7 9. c3 Bh5 10. Bd3 Re7 11. Rc1 Be8 12. Qa5 g6 13. c4 f5 14. c5 Nc8 15. exf5 gxf5 16. h4 Nh7 17. Kc2 f4 18. Bd2 Nf6 19. cxd6 Nxd6 20. Nc5 b6 21. Ne6+ Rxe6 22. Qa3 Nxd5 23. Kb1 Qg8 24. Be4 Bg6 25. Ka1 Bxe4 26. fxe4 Nf6 27. Bb4 Qxg2 28. Nd3 Nfxe4 29. Qb3 Rg6 30. Nxe5 Rg3 31. Qe6 Qh3 32. Qd5 f3 33. Qxa8 Kc8 34. Nc6 f2 35. Qxb8+ Kd7 36. Ne5+ Ke6 37. Rh1 Qxh1 38. Qxc7 Qxc1+ 39. Qxc1 Rg1 40. Nd3 Rxc1+ 41. Nxc1 f1=Q 0-1
That was fun
|Feb-19-18|| ||Marmot PFL: Thought the idea of 960 was to put the players on their own to the maximum so letting them prepare before the game with computers kind of defeats the purpose.|
|Feb-19-18|| ||morfishine: <Marmot PFL> UR correct, Chess960 forces the players to rely on intuition instead of ream after ream of opening data|
Thats the fun of it
|Feb-20-18|| ||chancho: <I think the Fischer Random (or Chess960) match against Hikaru Nakamura (who won the last Mainz unofficial World Championship back in 2009), held at the Henie Onstad art gallery in my former home-municipality Baerum, was a great success and well beyond what I had expected. |
The games, where a new piece set-up was randomly generated among the 960 possibilities for every second game to allow one white and one black each before moving to a new set-up, turned out to be rich in chess content, highly interesting and surprisingly taxing compared to classical chess by posing new and demanding challenges from move 1.
The match was hard fought, and while it took us some time to learn to absorb new structures, and both continued to be tempted to transform the positions into known classical structures throughout, especially the third and fourth day revealed such non-classical piece placement that we were consistently forced to enter pristine positional structures.
I hope there will be more such events in the future also at top level. Still, it will be a relief to return to classical chess in my next event in April.
Maybe some of the ideas seen and pursued in this match will serve as inspiration for me also in classical chess.
We played four days of slow rapidchess (each player having 45 minutes for 40 moves plus 15 minutes for the rest of the game) and 8 fast rapid-games on day 5 with 10 minutes + 5 seconds increment per move.
Starting with three hard-fought draws on day 1 and 2, the next 5 games were decided. I played quite well in game 4 and despite his stubborn defense I managed to win in the end.
He simply didnít have time to find all the only-moves in the tricky queen ending.
Nakamura as expected tried to complicate and avoid quiet positional struggles and sometimes accepted being worse out of the opening.
His clever defense and tenacious resourcefulness kept him in the match.
I could have taken a clear lead after four days but didnít claim a draw in time with rook and bishop against his rook in game 8.
Frustrated after squandering a won position, I lost my head, as could probably be seen by the higher pulse Ė we had heart rate monitors which I think is a great idea Ė and the unreal time loss was my involuntary additional contribution to chess as performance art taking place in the Dag Alving photo-art exhibition, partly about chess history, surrounding the match.
I had a 9-7 lead and was able to forget bygones and focus on having fun the last day.
Managing to hold the queen versus rook and pawn ending in game three yesterday was psychologically important, maybe even decisive. I won game four, and was happy to secure match victory by winning game 5 as well.
Iím not sure Iíve played more than 5 rapid games in one day before.
The energy level dropped dramatically, and we even started to make serious mistakes in well-known structures and endings.
I won 14-10 in the end and that is a decent result. Non the less, I think both of us could play better, and I already look forward to new Chess960 challenges in the not too far future.
The match was covered live by main channel NRK, and Iíd like to thank everyone involved for the great event!!
Magnus Carlsen, Oslo, February 14th, 2018>
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 51 OF 51 ·