Go back
rookless game

rookless game

Only Chess

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

hmmm. When I was new to the site I once or twice entered a game into an engine, set it to run without looking at it and just saw who won (without seeing what pieces or position were left). Thinking about it this was probably not OK, as knowing I was able to win could give me the psychological boost to help me do so. Isn't asking who's more likely to win the same?

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by chaswray
Uhh, yes it is, his post clearly asks "Who's favourite?"
"Who stands the best chance of winning given the initial odds" would be a quite different question from "who is winning".

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by chaswray
Open for negotiation. Maybe I'll auction it off. Do I have an opening bid?
I'll play you a pair of games with your choice of (standard) openings, plus I'll throw you one for free (i.e. I will voluntarily lose one to you).

In return I get that space for a month.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Game 1102729

I know the whole game is full of oversights.

I started the thread at move 21. I played poorly from then on and lost easily, however I think If I was in this situation again I would always prefer to have the queen and pawns.

I've consider myself told off for using an in progress game to stimulate a debate on the principles of a rookless.

Finally, Rag's point of how protected the king is could be pivotal.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

as the minor pieces were not coordinated to organize an attack, the side with the queen plus the pawns was much better.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.