Welcome to the Rook House Chess Blog. This portion of our website was designed to provide instant interaction with chess enthusiasts all over the world. We cover many topics such as chess news, chess history, and the occasional chess puzzle.

Please visit our main website at www.rookhouse.com and view our extensive collection of historical facts and games. Lastly, please remember to be civil and respectful to all users of this site.

March 31, 2008

Innovations In Chess

Filed under: History — Rook House @ 8:00 am

I have often heard that the game of chess needs to be amended, that computers have ruined the game, and that memorizations of openings have made chess mundane.  These same opinions have spurred various entities to create and recommend new versions of the game of chess. 

Bobby Fischer created Fischer Random Chess (also called Chess960), 3-way chess and 4-way chess variations have been kicked around, and Gothic Chess (originally thought up in principle by Capablanca in the 1920’s) has made an attempt to gain a following of it’s own.

I thoroughly believe that Classical Chess will never be “played out”.  This great game has stood the test of time over hundreds of years and will continue to do so for generations to come.  There will always be crackpots and naysayers that will attempt to ruin the game with hairbrain innovations of their own. 

Truth be told, Fischer was the only one with enough clout to recommend a variation.  He reached the highest pinnacle of the game and could recite over thousands of moves off the top of his head from games he played over 20 years ago.  Maybe it did become too easy for him, who knows?

The point is that this type of narrow thinking has been going on for hundreds of years, way before computers were even a thought.  To prove this, I have taken an excerpt from an article written in the 1887 Columbia Chess Chronicle:

Innovations In Chess

From time to time schemes are devised, for modifying the game of chess, or of introducing a new notation, thereby giving, according to its inventor, a greater diversity to the game or a superior facility in writing down the moves.  Recently the chess editor of the Globe Democrat of St.Louis has invented a novel piece which he calls the "Chancellor" and which combines the power of Rook and Knight.

He has even organised a problem tournament in which this novel piece should be utilized.  This innovation, like all its precedents, will live as long as its author will occupy himself with it, and then sink into oblivion.  Our game as it is, universally adopted, should be maintained with all its qualities and all its faults, it is already inexhaustible in variety, in opening as well as in the ending.

Do we not see in every instance, the greatest theorists rejecting to-morrow and their preconisations of to-night!  The inventor of the "Chancellor" may perhaps become convinced, that the discovery of errors in the thousands of chess volumes already printed, yields a large field for the ingenuity of chess enthusiasts, and that the demand for "novelties" makes itself felt nowhere. -- La Strategie

• • •

10 Comments »

  1. NO-NO-NO, SAY IT AIN’T SO – ED TRICE LIED???? That is so sad too, because I didn’t have the time to break even more bad news to him. Here’s a post on an obscure website from Ed Trice:

    “There’s one immediate problem with the Labate theory. You see, I am not married, nor have I ever been, so I have no “sister-in-law” that lives in Canada.”

    Yet on his ‘Windows Live’ profile:
    http://spaces.live.com/profile.aspx?cid=8738226608896281660

    Public nickname: GothicChessPro
    Gender: Male
    Occupation: Inventor

    More about me: I am very interested in playing Gothic Chess (80 square chess with an Archbishop and Chancellor as 2 new pieces) with people from all over the world. Go to BrainKing.com and look for GothicChessPro.

    Contact info
    Personal -Name: Ed Trice
    Social – Marital status: Married

    HOLY CRAP…an volunteers to let him in on the good/bad news about his marriage…42 years old, and already shows serious signs of Alzheimer.

    SAD, SO SAD, now he never get a chance to get over 1400…well, maybe in the next life, eh????

    P.S. Love your site, Kevin!!

    Edward Labate — March 31, 2008 @ 1:57 pm

  2. You know, this guy Ed Trice has been popping up on forum and blog threads all over lately. It’s kind of funny that you were able to produce this article from over 130 years ago with the exact same idea for a chess piece.

    A wise man once told me “If you’ll lie about one thing, you’ll lie about EVERYTHING.”

    Nice article, hope to see more stuff from that time period in future postings.

    Vince — March 31, 2008 @ 3:14 pm

  3. I definitely know what you’re saying Vince, and all I’m going to say is that it’s not worth my time to comment on all of the lies and transgressions of Mr. Trice. I think Mr. Labate has accurately said it all …… just check out his website.

    And yes, I definitely plan on posting more about this particular era (late 1800’s & early 1900’s) of chess, as it has become a serious research hobby of mine.

    Thanks for the comments!!

    Rook House — March 31, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

  4. I thought Henry Bird invented the idea of a 10×8 board with the two extra pieces (the rook/knight and the bishop/knight), but when I checked on Wikipeida I discovered I was out by several hundred years!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capablanca_chess

    In 1617, Pietro Carrera published a book Il Gioco degli Scacchi, which contained a description of a chess variant played on 8×10 board. He placed new pieces between a rook and a knight. Chancellor was on the king’s side and archbishop on the queen’s side. Carrera used names champion instead of chancellor and centaur instead of archbishop. The game was largely forgotten after the death of the inventor.

    I can’t believe Ed Trice has the nerve to go around saying he invented a new variant of chess when all he did was shuffle a few pieces around!

    Jon D'Souza-Eva — April 1, 2008 @ 6:01 am

  5. AS STATED in this post!! “Recently the chess editor of the Globe Democrat of St.Louis has invented a novel piece which he calls the “CHANCELLOR” and which combines the power of Rook and Knight.” (1887 Columbia Chess Chronicle)

    Ed Trice, you take credit for something that’s been around for 110 years?!?! What a class act!!! In fact, here’s a very probable scenario:

    ‘Christmas Day, 1930: 6 year old twins Johnny and Mary received a Capablanca set for Christmas…Opened the box, set the pieces up ‘wrong’, and VOILA!!! The true inventors of the Ed Trice patented version???’

    He claims my autographed Fischer book was a fake, yet Lawrence Totaro (a noted expert on forgeries) confirmed it was genuine. http://www.labatechess.com/61_games.html

    Notice one other thing too…he’s made no comments on Cathy Purdy/Bookmasters confirming he did contact her in July/August 2007 about printing My 61 Memorable Games… which predates his claim of no knowledge about My 61 Memorable Games…by two months. His SILENCE is DEAFENING!!

    Additionally, he falsely claims I was bankrupt in California, but all of a sudden I have enough $$$ to print lots and lots of books, and then I have lot’s of $$$ to just send them away to Europe, and then lost it all because of an inability to sell them, yet I’m still apparently solvent. WHERE THE HELL DOES ANY OF THIS MAKE SENSE…ANY OF IT??? And if I printed them here in the USA which is what he’s claiming, who was the printer…put out a feeler and see who responds…

    Nothing stops Ed Trice, especially facts and logic!!!

    Edward Labate

    Edward Labate — April 1, 2008 @ 6:58 am

  6. The reality of these variants, Capablanca and otherwise, is that when you look at the chess pieces, and you think on them, you can begin to think the set is incomplete. The Knight move is not integrated into any other piece. It is this thinking, 17th century on, that keeps the Knight+Rook, Knight+Bishop, and Knight+Queen still on the minds of people when they think of chess. Many have attempted to integrate these into chess, complete with Capablanca, who now bears the most recent name.

    This being said, I would like to offer some questions on chess for anyone who thinks that adapting changes to it as some sort of crackpots and naysayers that seek to ruin a “perfect game” with hairbrain innovations. In other words, if the game is so perfect now, please answer and comment on these:
    1. Please identify a handicapping system for chess, that would enable the top player and the lower player to play a game that would be challenging for both. Go has it, and other games do also.
    2. If chess is so perfect, then why do you see example after example of top players desiring to provide new things to it, such as Capablanca? This goes to also Fischer and Bronstein both proposing different clocks to.
    3. If chess is so perfect the way it is now, why are there so many draw on the highest level?
    4. If chess is so perfect, can you name the prize money given out at the last world championship? Do you even know who won, and how much money the won? Do you even know where it is?
    5. If chess is so perfect, why is Chess960 (FRC) actually picking up a following?
    6. If chess is so perfect, why is Rock-Paper-Scissor able to get on ESPN, yet chess isn’t anywhere to be found?
    7. If chess is so perfect, what can you tell me about the World Mind Sports Games going on this year, that will have chess at it?
    8. If chess is so perfect now, how come there is a longing for the days of Bobby Fischer to return?

    I raise these questions and comments, to then look at the claims of perfection claimed. Yes, chess is a game people can pick up hundreds of years from now and people play, providing they don’t read anything but the most basic of books. People even play “solved” games like Connect Four still. I mean hard solved games. Kids play boxes and crosses to.

    Rich Hutnik — April 6, 2008 @ 2:45 pm

  7. “2-8: 2. If chess is so perfect…” I don’t know Mr. Hutnik, so I am assuming he is a decent person, and therefore my comments are directed at his statements, not Mr. Hutnik himself. I hope they’ll be taken in that vein!

    I have two questions:
    1] What is Rich Hutnik’s rating. I get ill when I hear players rated under 1384 talking about the simplicity of chess or the solvability of chess, yet have a ranking suggesting at least four more classes to go before achieving ‘Mastery’ let along Perfection or Solving chess. And yes, a mastery of chess is the minimum to allege ‘If chess is so perfect…’, then…!

    2] “3. If chess is so perfect the way it is now, why are there so many draw on the highest level?”

    Because most of today’s top players wouldn’t know what an ATHLETIC SUPPORTER IS FOR. You need to find chess players with a ‘STEEL PAIR’. Players who want to win, and consider a draw LOSING half a point

    You want to avoid grandmaster draws?? 200 move minimum or bare kings. Achieving neither, the result is mute. You need chess players like Fischer and Larsen who believed that you lose half a point when you draw. Neither side gets anything for their efforts, and you set up the pieces again. You don’t leave the playing hall (except for restroom area visits), until a decisive result is registered. You make chess a sport again, and anybody who thinks it isn’t a sport, just watch your older players fade in the 3rd and 4th hour!!

    You want to avoid draws??? Commit all five volumes of the Encyclopedia of Chess Endings to memory; and then play it out to move 200!! You can avoid Grandmaster Draws/Allusion Chess if you want to do the work. Why did Fischer and Larsen do it, and Topalov today?? They weren’t afraid to lose because the prospects of winning were so much more appealing, that the possibility of a loss doesn’t really enter in to it. I’m only 2100 (and probably overrated at that!!), yet I never ever sit down hoping that ‘I don’t lose!’…I want my opponent to get up after the game knowing he was in a war, and nothing short of that!!!

    Thank you so much for your time in reading this!!

    WE’RE NOW ON AMAZON.COM WITH OVER 1400 CHESS Books UP.
    http://www.amazon.com/shops/labatechess
    P.S. newest website listings
    http://www.labatechess.com/store/
    ALSO, MUST READING / Please forward as a warning and Public Service Announcement/PSA to all you know:
    http://www.labatechess.com/61_games.html RE: My 61 Memorable Games Hoax
    http://www.labatechess.com/ed_trice.html RE: ‘PHILLY PHRAUD’, Ed Trice/Gothic Chess
    http://www.labatechess.com/robert_snyder.html RE: Convicted Felon/Pedophile, Robert Snyder
    http://www.labatechess.com/f_list.html RE: Lying Blackmailer Olaf Wolna

    Edward Labate — April 6, 2008 @ 4:28 pm

  8. THE VALUE OF GOTHIC CHESS AND THE VALUE OF INTEGRITY

    I actually think Gothic Chess is a great game.
    Had it been marketed and promoted with INTEGRITY,
    it might well be a success today.

    I am by no means a talented chess player, but for me,
    Gothic Chess is fun, challenging, and exciting.
    There was a time when I was very enthusiastic
    about it. So, the problem is not the game –
    the problem is the dishonest business dynamics
    that have accompanied it.

    Perhaps as recently as a generation ago, the “lets
    make money at any cost” mentality was normal and acceptable.
    Today, however, integrity is the new benchmark of success.

    Without integrity, long term success is impossible, no
    matter how many other pieces of the pie you’ve got going.
    Even the ENRONS of the world cannot sustain their business power
    and wealth without integrity. They eventually crumble and
    die under the weight of their own lies.

    Integrity extends beyond business too… Without integrity,
    failure is the ultimate destination in any endeavor. Even
    in the rare cases when a person “gets away with something”, they
    will never experience genuine satisfaction or happiness from it.

    Real success and abiding happiness go hand in hand.
    They arise from honesty in dealing with reality,
    and one can NEVER escape the karma of their own
    actions.

    Ironically, those that would benefit the most from these fundamental understandings seem to resist them the most. Chalk it up to human
    nature: Most people are very slow to change the way they think, act,
    and behave. We can only pray for the unfortunate souls that
    have yet to grasp this lesson to cross over that
    critical line of integrity.

    In closing, let us appreciate Gothic Chess for the fun game it is,
    while keeping a sharp eye open to spot the non-integrous.

    Claude — November 5, 2008 @ 4:25 am

  9. Well said, Claude. All games that challenge the mind have value in some way, while integrity itself is completely invaluable.

    Thanks for posting.

    Rook House — November 5, 2008 @ 7:05 pm

  10. Mr. Trice has had his self placed biography on Wikipedia taken down and has also had his “legallyownlandonmars.com” website removed by law enforcement officials. Claudes prediction of karma seems to be very true.
    I understand that Trice has lost his patent for the game so now it is open for anyone to use for free!

    robmtchl — February 5, 2009 @ 1:40 pm

Comments RSS • TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

E-Mail Us | Powered by WordPress | Copyright © 2006-2008 Rook House. All Rights Reserved. | Site best viewed at 1280 x 1024.