Hi~ well, everybody here plays chess. and chinese chess?
i realized today that although the pieces moves on a similar way and we have king, rook, pawns, knights....the games is totally diferent. I think i can beat my father on regular chess, but today i just got owned on chinese chess twice.
so........ to anyone who is average at both what are the diferences? wich one is more complex? etc?
i think the game on chinese chess is faster also coz there are battles all around the table. while regular chess MAY be more complex? dunno
I only play a little bit of Chinese chess, but I think International Chess is more complicated. The cannon things, somewhat limited horse movement, and the king can't face other king thing IMO makes it a little more complicated rule-wise, but not as complex and diverse as international chess.
I used to play a little of both and found them equally difficult. The rules are superficially similiar but with differences that make a significant difference in play. Some examples: elephants can't cross the river and their movement is extremely limited. Cannons have to "jump" over pieces to capture the enemy, which make them less and less powerful as the game progresses, because there are fewer pieces left to "jump" over. Perhaps at higher levels the difference in difficulty is more apparent?
On October 29 2006 17:31 haduken wrote: international cheese is way way way more complex. Chinese chess is pretty easy so long u follow the required openings.
u are completely wrong, Chinese chess is way more complex, although it looks simple, it has way more VARIATIONS than regular chess, if u play both very well u'll understand what i said.
On October 29 2006 17:31 haduken wrote: international cheese is way way way more complex. Chinese chess is pretty easy so long u follow the required openings.
u are completely wrong, Chinese chess is way more complex, although it looks simple, it has way more VARIATIONS than regular chess, if u play both very well u'll understand what i said.
I'm pretty sure international chess is more complex. Even though Chinese chess has more spaces and types of pieces, it is strategically simpler than international chess. There are many more variations of games, but far fewer different positions.
The basic ideas apply to both: at a beginning level, know some basic openings, watch out for the same tactics: the fork, pin, etc. Add in a few different rules: cannon pins, blocking horses and knights. Once you're past that, the strategies aren't too different: develop pieces, fight for control of center and space... if you're good at regular chess, you'll improve pretty quickly at Chinese chess with experience =)
They're about the same skill wise but it's just international chess is about 100x more popular. Chinese chess tend to freeze. It's like two players wresling into a lock position where if anyone dared to move he'll get owned hardcore where as international chess has less "freeze" moments. I play both though And yeah Old chinese men play chinese chess every single day while wearing short shorts and vests smoking and drinking rice wine xD
imo the complex is about the same inter chess' rule is more complex, unit movement of chinese chess is more complex i like chinese chess better because of its fast pace, lot of harassing + killing. inter chess is more positioning ur pwn and all the unit + turtle the king
When I went to China for missions this summer, I played and CRUSHED the kids at Chinese Chess. Where I went to high school, all my friends were Chinese and I learned Chinese Chess. I was about a 1700 ELO regular Chess player (yeah I was a freaking nerd but don't imagnie fat asian kid with glasses, imagine 6' 200 pound hockey player with intelligence ;D).
From someone who knows how to play both games decently, I have to say International Chess (Western Chess if you will) is by FAR more complicated then Chinese Chess. There is FAR less strategy involved in Chinese Chess. It's just attack and whoever attacks better wins. Chess you have aspects of pawn formation, defense, counting which squares are owned, dark square vs light square weaknesses, potential sacrifices, and the list goes on and on. I picked up Chinese Chess way too quickly for it to be complicated. None of my Chinese friends can beat me.
I used to play religiously on FICS with this program called Thief but since college started last year I gave more priority to StarCraft =D. Though whenever I take a crap I bring out some old Chess books. ㅋㅋㅋ
in pro level, u can't come back when u have a significant disadvantage in chess, but in chinese chess, there are so many special moves which can make u come back and win the game in big disadvantage.
1700 is good, but not like extraordinary, i was 1600 when i was 14, then quit chess. I'll trust his judgement though. I don't know Chinese chess at all, except for the rules (and that the notation seems illogical, much harder to read than with conventional chess). Seems to me that soldiers, elephants and mandarins are just a lot of junk sitting around, the chariots, cannons and horses do all the real work (only 90% of the time of course).
I used to be passable at both--at upper amateur level at least. I'd say that international chess is more...subtle. It's more complex, with more possibilities for different openings and endgames. In Chinese Chess, the pieces are too limited by movement restrictions for achieve the same amount of depth in gameplay. That said, Chinese Chess is still a nice game, and you get a lot of exciting, tactical, two-edged positions. Part of that is the openness of the board, and the other part is the strong cannon piece that can leapfrog over others. In fact, I'd say that Chinese Chess is akin somewhat to International Chess in which only the Épine Dorsale (up to a trade or two) can be played.
I think Chinese Chess is fun, because a lot of tacitcal planning is involved and you see a lot of cutthroat games, but there's very little strategy and any depth to the game. But even then, Chinese Chess players can't handle Chess but Chess players can MANHANDLE Chinese Chess players at their own game. Just for fun one period after AP testing in AP Calculus, the president of the Chinese Chess club brought out his set. I said, hey I know to play. Let's go!
He got schooled and he asked me to join his club. I said no.
I guess I generalize it a lot when I say Chess players > Chinese Chess players but Chess players have a far better thought process when making a move because the game has just far too many complications than to just attack with two or three pieces. In Chess, one move can threaten SO many things. Chess also can be played through a variety of styles. A very wild attacking and sacrifical style of chess was played by Mikhail Tal. A very defensive and preventative choking style of play was exhibited by Tigran Petrosian. A very strategically complicated style of play was shown by Emanuel Lasker.
A lot of times I like to think of StarCraft as the Chess of video games. As in, it's freaking perfect.
On October 29 2006 17:31 haduken wrote: international cheese is way way way more complex. Chinese chess is pretty easy so long u follow the required openings.
Eh, no? The gametree complexit of chinese chess is higher than regular chess, followed by janggi, shogi and lastly by the infinitely more complex Go (weiqi, baduk).
FrozenArbiter. No man, I don't think so my friend. Fischer Random Chess has 960 different starting positions, and is played like regular international chess. That is the most complex game I feel.
And to be honest, International Chess is the most balanced board game of all time. Why do you think people are making a living from just playing it, computer chess programs have been developing for decades (and people are buying them). It's just like Starcraft - there are many other computer games more complex than this (like Civ 4?) but Starcraft is much more popular as it is simple enough, but complex enough to be fun and enjoyable on all levels (noob to pro).
I somehow find that complexity don't bother me, since a specific level is reached. I enjoy classical chess more, but like to relax sometimes with chinese chess.
all competitive sports or games are equally difficult because you are competing against another PERSON, not the fucking game. Regardless of war2, war3, starcraft, halo, chess, chinese chess, go, if you send 60 hours a week practicing and you are playing another person who practices 60 hours a week, it's gonna be hard.
With that out of the way, i'd say that the differences between chinese chess and international chess is that chinese chess tends to be more tactical in nature whereas international chess has a lot more to do with maneuvering and strategies. This is because international chess has so many more pawns that tie up the game, and literally, up to half of the squares are occupied by pieces. In chinese chess, the squares are occupied by less pieces, and most of the offensive units can more around much more easily so there's more tactics involved with relatively speaking, less focus on positional variations (relative to chess).
I play chess. i love when i go back to china and school all the old people who are playing chinese chess. it's too bad that people don't play it as much as they used too. in the good old days, if you're on a train, there will be people playing chess and a group watching. Now, i was on a train several times and didn't see one chess game. curse the new generation!
One Page Memory from Bulgaria. Are you pissed that Topalov lost? You know the better player won right? (Kramnik). Oh and Topalov lost 2 back to back games against Judit Polgar. He must be pissed himself. And tired I guess.
On October 29 2006 20:03 overuoveruoveru wrote: in pro level, u can't come back when u have a significant disadvantage in chess, but in chinese chess, there are so many special moves which can make u come back and win the game in big disadvantage.
if you can easily come back from a disadvantage, it's not really a disadvantage is it? ... dork...
maybe what you are trying to say is that material advantages are less pronounced in midgame in chinese chess, but are more pronounced in midgame in classical chess. yes?
On October 30 2006 01:48 IIICodeIIIIIII wrote: all competitive sports or games are equally difficult because you are competing against another PERSON, not the fucking game. Regardless of war2, war3, starcraft, halo, chess, chinese chess, go, if you send 60 hours a week practicing and you are playing another person who practices 60 hours a week, it's gonna be hard.
With that out of the way, i'd say that the differences between chinese chess and international chess is that chinese chess tends to be more tactical in nature whereas international chess has a lot more to do with maneuvering and strategies. This is because international chess has so many more pawns that tie up the game, and literally, up to half of the squares are occupied by pieces. In chinese chess, the squares are occupied by less pieces, and most of the offensive units can more around much more easily so there's more tactics involved with relatively speaking, less focus on positional variations (relative to chess).
I play chess. i love when i go back to china and school all the old people who are playing chinese chess. it's too bad that people don't play it as much as they used too. in the good old days, if you're on a train, there will be people playing chess and a group watching. Now, i was on a train several times and didn't see one chess game. curse the new generation!
Wow, chinese chess more tactical. I don't know much about chinese chess, but dude, go look at Mikhail Tal's best (international chess) games. Actually, you probably won't understand the depth of most of his tactics anyway, so don't worry if you can't comprehend his games fully.
On October 29 2006 17:31 haduken wrote: international cheese is way way way more complex. Chinese chess is pretty easy so long u follow the required openings.
cheese? Yeah... Cheese is like totally... Mindblowing... dude!!!
Theory for Chinese chess is not nearly as developed as for international chess, but even so I would say in the end international chess is more complex.
On October 30 2006 01:42 ssj100 wrote: FrozenArbiter. No man, I don't think so my friend. Fischer Random Chess has 960 different starting positions, and is played like regular international chess. That is the most complex game I feel.
And to be honest, International Chess is the most balanced board game of all time. Why do you think people are making a living from just playing it, computer chess programs have been developing for decades (and people are buying them). It's just like Starcraft - there are many other computer games more complex than this (like Civ 4?) but Starcraft is much more popular as it is simple enough, but complex enough to be fun and enjoyable on all levels (noob to pro).
Well, maybe fischer random chess is more complex, no idea, but people are making a living playing Go, as well (in asia it's pretty big, I know korea has a TV channel dedicated to only Go, dunno about japan/china).
EDIT: Although, it's strange that computers are able to beat top players at Random Chess, whereas they can't even beat amateurs in go.
But, I don't know much about making programs to play a game, or about game tree complexity, or about chess/go so I'm just gonna shut up now!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity Chess960 = random chess, right? Listed near the top but well below Go, however maybe what you mean when you say complexity is something else, dunno :o
On October 30 2006 01:49 ssj100 wrote: One Page Memory from Bulgaria. Are you pissed that Topalov lost? You know the better player won right? (Kramnik). Oh and Topalov lost 2 back to back games against Judit Polgar. He must be pissed himself. And tired I guess.
No, I am not pissed. I state my opinion in the thread about the match. Generally I share your opinion that Kramnik is more complex player, but in some aspects Topa is better. About the losses from Polgar - I dunno, the record between two is ridiculous high in favor of Topalov. Edit: And in Bulgaria the people love Topalov, but the chess players - don't. It's typical bulgarian, but it's also frustrating when all the funds go to one man, even world champion, and the clubs gets none. Do you want to know how much my club is getting from the goverment/bulgarian chess association? About 400 USD per year. Fair enough?
Get's freaking complicated b/c you can re-use pieces that you have taken from your opponent and place them anywhere on the board. (cant put two pawns on teh same column tho)
All pieces get a "promotion" when reaching the last 3 rows. It's an interesting game. Used to play it a little when I was like 12 years old.
Apparently Connect 4 and the game Daikon (Congklak in Indonesia) have been fully solved.
And if Wikipedia is correct, they have also nearly cracked chess and checkers? Although I'm not sure they'll be able to finish their analysis with current computing power =P
I don't think Chinese chess is any simpler... Both games require a lot of strategy. In a sense, I think Chinese chess is more tactical, and international chess more positional. Your pieces matter a lot more in international chess (can't drop pawns without a good reason, actually) but in Chinese chess, GMs frequently sacrifice pieces to gain the initiative.
And no, Chinese chess is not as drawish at the GM level. It's actually much livelier than international chess.
On October 29 2006 20:03 overuoveruoveru wrote: in pro level, u can't come back when u have a significant disadvantage in chess, but in chinese chess, there are so many special moves which can make u come back and win the game in big disadvantage.
if you can easily come back from a disadvantage, it's not really a disadvantage is it? ... dork...
maybe what you are trying to say is that material advantages are less pronounced in midgame in chinese chess, but are more pronounced in midgame in classical chess. yes?
I would call being down a chariot and a cannon a pretty big disadvantage.
I´ve played all kind of chess for a long time (>10 years)and I think Go is the most complicate board game. Chess program Deep Fritz (1 dvd) already beat any human but a best Go program can not defeat 3 dan players (9 dan is the highest rank.)
Imo, chess is more complex but people played it too much and turn it into a tree of best moves. At pro level, all player choose positional style, in the beginning one player has a little positional advantage, then it grows bigger, then turn into one pawn advantage, then endgame. Thats why nowaday we only see beautiful gambit and attack in chinese chess.
On October 30 2006 06:34 larra wrote: I´ve played all kind of chess for a long time (>10 years)and I think Go is the most complicate board game. Chess program Deep Fritz (1 dvd) already beat any human but a best Go program can not defeat 3 dan players (9 dan is the highest rank.)
Imo, chess is more complex but people played it too much and turn it into a tree of best moves. At pro level, all player choose positional style, in the beginning one player has a little positional advantage, then it grows bigger, then turn into one pawn advantage, then endgame. Thats why nowaday we only see beautiful gambit and attack in chinese chess.
One of the early drivers of computer go research was the Ing Prize, a relatively large money award sponsored by Taiwanese computer magnate Ing Chang-ki of Acer, offered annually between 1985 and 2000 at the World Computer Go Congress (or Ing Cup). The winner of this tournament was allowed to challenge young professionals at a handicap in a short match. If the computer won the match, the prize was awarded and a new prize announced: a larger prize for beating the professionals at a lesser handicap. The series of Ing prizes was set to expire either 1) in the year 2000 or 2) when a program could beat a 1-dan professional at no handicap for 40,000,000 NT dollars. The last winner was Handtalk in 1997, claiming 250,000 NT dollars for winning an 11-stone handicap match against three 8-9 year old professionals. At the time the prize expired in 2000, the unclaimed prize was 550,000 NT dollars for winning a 9-stone handicap match.
On October 30 2006 02:27 thedeadhaji wrote: Shogi: Japanese Chess
Get's freaking complicated b/c you can re-use pieces that you have taken from your opponent and place them anywhere on the board. (cant put two pawns on teh same column tho)
All pieces get a "promotion" when reaching the last 3 rows. It's an interesting game. Used to play it a little when I was like 12 years old.
that looks like a mix of chinese and international chess. lol... but u guys have to name all the pieces with two characters dont u.
On October 30 2006 01:48 IIICodeIIIIIII wrote: all competitive sports or games are equally difficult because you are competing against another PERSON, not the fucking game. Regardless of war2, war3, starcraft, halo, chess, chinese chess, go, if you send 60 hours a week practicing and you are playing another person who practices 60 hours a week, it's gonna be hard.
With that out of the way, i'd say that the differences between chinese chess and international chess is that chinese chess tends to be more tactical in nature whereas international chess has a lot more to do with maneuvering and strategies. This is because international chess has so many more pawns that tie up the game, and literally, up to half of the squares are occupied by pieces. In chinese chess, the squares are occupied by less pieces, and most of the offensive units can more around much more easily so there's more tactics involved with relatively speaking, less focus on positional variations (relative to chess).
I play chess. i love when i go back to china and school all the old people who are playing chinese chess. it's too bad that people don't play it as much as they used too. in the good old days, if you're on a train, there will be people playing chess and a group watching. Now, i was on a train several times and didn't see one chess game. curse the new generation!
Wow, chinese chess more tactical. I don't know much about chinese chess, but dude, go look at Mikhail Tal's best (international chess) games. Actually, you probably won't understand the depth of most of his tactics anyway, so don't worry if you can't comprehend his games fully.
omg you dumb fart. you are trying to troll me? Are you completely stupid? There are so many reasons that you didn't even think about. Don't Mikhail Tal me. Why don't you shove him up your pink little ass (refering to the donkey if Mani is reading this) (I support donkey rights).
Take any classical chess opening. In the beginning, it's RELATIVELY more strategic position based. When more and more pieces are traded off and both side make commitments, the strategy transitions into tactics when there are fewer and fewer pieces on the board. so take classical chess with 32 pieces on the board, take off 16 of those pieces. of the 16 pieces left, say that half of them can't even move across the board. Essentially, you'll have 8 "mobile" pieces which is essentially chinese chess. So basically, chinese chess STARTS the game in the endgame relative to classical chess. now don't try to argue that the endgame has more strategy RELATIVE to the opening. yes, you said you don't know much about chinese chess. Don't BS me when you don't know what you're talking about.
Secondly, I did mention that difficulty of ANY competative game/sport is equal because you are competing against another person, not the game. If you are competing against other people around your skill level as is often the case, then the only constant in the difficulty of the people you are competing against IS YOURSELF. lets then conclude that in competative games, true masters of competition understand that the greatest obstacle to victory that demands to be understood is THEIR SELVES. lets say that your skill level is denoted by constant C.
lets say that the difficulty of chess is in variations denoted by V. Variations can be denoted by a mix of strategy 'S' (long term position) and tactics 'T' (short term variational analysis). This means that C = V, and V = S * T, and so C = S * T, which is translated as "the difficulty of playing a competative sport" is equal to "my skill level which determins the skill of the people i play against", and my skill level is determined by my understanding of "strategy" and "tactics".
When you move from classical chess to chinese chess, C stays constant. S (strategy) decreases, therefore, T (tactics) must necessarily increase. YOU DORK on the other hand argue incessently that C can be constant while maintaining that S and T both decrease. That is pure insanity, and I don't mean the genius type. I mean the dumb type.
perhaps what you are refering to is lowering the constant C and therefore, allowing both S and T to decrease at the same time. basically what this translates to is that when you are playing chinese chess, you seek out players who aren't as good as you, and so you can devote less of your skill (S * T) and still win. WHY WOULD YOU play a competative game, and only find people who are worse than you. that defeats the purpose. "Ohhhhhh, I played for cumulative 500 hours over 10 years, and this other person played cumulative 100 hours over 20 years, and I beat him. damn, i'm so gosu." Umh.. no, ur dumb.
Gosu (go su o)(n) - meaning master, one who possesses understanding of all the elements of a game ""... unless refering to the one who is called ssj100, in which case it means DUMB.
- sincerely, your friend Code
GG, NO RE No n00bs were hurt in the production of this response, unless you are ssj100, in which case you are DUMB *(i.e., see below) ^__^***.
On October 30 2006 01:49 ssj100 wrote: One Page Memory from Bulgaria. Are you pissed that Topalov lost? You know the better player won right? (Kramnik). Oh and Topalov lost 2 back to back games against Judit Polgar. He must be pissed himself. And tired I guess.
looks like ssj100 is trolling and basically picking fights. It's not just that I'm being mean. He's basically looking for a fight. My logic is sound. I can't help that I'm defending it passionately. ^_^ many thanks for reading my reply.
Whoa there Code, it's just a GAME. We are all entitled to our opinions so let's not resort to name calling, preez?
Unforutnately Code, your C_Chess = C_Chinese Chess has a hole in it. Who said they were equal?
Yes, Chinese Chess uses more tactics than strategy in the game, but is the tactics of Chinese Chess more difficult and complicated than the tactics of Chess? From personal experience, I think Chess tactics are FOR more advanced than Chinese Chess tactics. The limited movement of many pieces makes tactics so much easier in Chinese Chess. I only have to worry about a few pieces such as the Cannon or Knight or the Car. Chess tactics can involve EVERY single piece and can occur ANYWHERE on the board. There are MILLIONS of difficult combinative tactical positions that are VERY difficult to solve.
Take any classical chess opening. In the beginning, it's RELATIVELY more strategic position based. When more and more pieces are traded off and both side make commitments, the strategy transitions into tactics when there are fewer and fewer pieces on the board. so take classical chess with 32 pieces on the board, take off 16 of those pieces. of the 16 pieces left, say that half of them can't even move across the board. Essentially, you'll have 8 "mobile" pieces which is essentially chinese chess.
Sadly, you generalize chess way too much. Tactics doesn't happen when only half the pieces are gone from the board. They can happen with all the pieces. That's what's so beauitful about chess. You can utilize every single piece to take advantage of a castled pawn position. You can create a tactic with all the pieces on the board or create a tactic with next to no pieces on the board. You claim that since Chinese Chess has LESS pieces it produces MORE tactics. I think since it has LESS pieces it produces LESS tactics, no? It has less chances since their are less pieces on the board.
So basically, chinese chess STARTS the game in the endgame relative to classical chess. now don't try to argue that the endgame has more strategy RELATIVE to the opening.
Endgame in Chess is ruthless logic. No strategy no tactics. Nothing but cold hard calculation. Nearly all strategies' goals are to give you the better endgame position perhaps with an extra pawn or a passed pawn or better King position. Strategy is defined as a general plan for a long term advantage. When you begin an opening, that's when ALL the strategy starts and unfolds. If you still think that endgames have long term effects even though the game is already at its end, you are not thinking about strategy.
yes, you said you don't know much about chinese chess. Don't BS me when you don't know what you're talking about.
I know it's not directed towards me but I know how to play both rather well so I can't BS you, ;D.
On October 31 2006 00:19 jkillashark wrote: Whoa there Code, it's just a GAME. We are all entitled to our opinions so let's not resort to name calling, preez?
Unforutnately Code, your C_Chess = C_Chinese Chess has a hole in it. Who said they were equal?
Yes, Chinese Chess uses more tactics than strategy in the game, but is the tactics of Chinese Chess more difficult and complicated than the tactics of Chess? From personal experience, I think Chess tactics are FOR more advanced than Chinese Chess tactics. The limited movement of many pieces makes tactics so much easier in Chinese Chess. I only have to worry about a few pieces such as the Cannon or Knight or the Car. Chess tactics can involve EVERY single piece and can occur ANYWHERE on the board. There are MILLIONS of difficult combinative tactical positions that are VERY difficult to solve.
Take any classical chess opening. In the beginning, it's RELATIVELY more strategic position based. When more and more pieces are traded off and both side make commitments, the strategy transitions into tactics when there are fewer and fewer pieces on the board. so take classical chess with 32 pieces on the board, take off 16 of those pieces. of the 16 pieces left, say that half of them can't even move across the board. Essentially, you'll have 8 "mobile" pieces which is essentially chinese chess.
Sadly, you generalize chess way too much. Tactics doesn't happen when only half the pieces are gone from the board. They can happen with all the pieces. That's what's so beauitful about chess. You can utilize every single piece to take advantage of a castled pawn position. You can create a tactic with all the pieces on the board or create a tactic with next to no pieces on the board. You claim that since Chinese Chess has LESS pieces it produces MORE tactics
So basically, chinese chess STARTS the game in the endgame relative to classical chess. now don't try to argue that the endgame has more strategy RELATIVE to the opening.
Endgame in Chess is ruthless logic. No strategy no tactics. Nothing but cold hard calculation. Nearly all strategies' goals are to give you the better endgame position perhaps with an extra pawn or a passed pawn or better King position. Strategy is defined as a general plan for a long term advantage. When you begin an opening, that's when ALL the strategy starts and unfolds. If you still think that endgames have long term effects even though the game is already at its end, you are not thinking about strategy.
yes, you said you don't know much about chinese chess. Don't BS me when you don't know what you're talking about.
I know it's not directed towards me but I know how to play both rather well so I can't BS you, ;D.
I enjoyed reading your well thought out response. I'm happy to note that many of our disagreements are based on a loose definition of terms which quite frankly, means that they aren't disagreements at all really. I kinda feel like ssj100 deserved my response for flaming me. It would be a compliment to say that his logic was ill thought out (I don't think he thought before posting), and making it personal with his comment on Tal and "enjoy" ... "lack of appreciation".
Though I would like to discuss competition and difficulty. For me, difficulty isn't measured by what I'm doing when I'm playing the game. That's just the vehicle that difficulty utilizes. Difficulty is the 60 hours of preparation per week for the year previous to the event. I think we can all agree that for top levels of all competitive sports, the difficulty is pretty much at the range of 60-80 hours a week for pretty much their lifetime (chess grandmasters, pingpong players, pro gamers, olympians, etc).
When you spoke of my constant C, you refered to chinese chess being a simpler game. I think this is along the lines of how chinese chess can be "solved" more easily relative to classical chess. Though this is a valid point, I think our arguments aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Until chinese chess is definately solved, you can spend 60 hours a week mastering it and still be beat by someone spending 80 hours a week. We can agree that 60 hr/week is hard, no? and that you can still lose to someone of 80 hr/wk, no? Even though for the 2-4 hour long game, your analysis may not be as strategy oriented, you'll be busting your brain to figure out how to win in any way, and still lose. the fact that it chinese chess doesn't make a difference. Competition is the truth for chinese chess, classical, go, or anything. ^___^.
eagerly awaiting your well thought out response. Ill thought out responses, especially those that make things personal, may make me feel bad. ^_^ hehe
edit: btw, i like your notation "C_ChineseChess". You do programming don't you. haha. ok. return p_ChineseChess->p_SkillConstant->FurtherAnalysis(&jkillashark) % p_ClassicalChess->p_SkillConstant->FurtherAnalysis(&jkillashark);
** hug **. ssj100 was just picking on me, but I showed him. ^___^. my dad and I used to play chinese chess together on the train when we used to be on good terms. He'd tell me about great chinese warlord and the strategy that they used and i thought i was like his apprentice and he'll be teaching me to be great like we were battling over the chess board. That was a long time ago. Chinese chess on trains with chinese food and lovely sceneary is one of my only good memories with my elders before stuff fell apart. they never appreciated me because i spoiled them too much. I'm too good for them. the bastards.
your quote "do your best, God will do the rest" is similar to one I believe in "God makes things possible. It's up to me to make things happen."
my sincere apologies to Kacas the op of this thread. Yaaaaa baby. believer right here. i'm assuming u r 2. i'm typically a peace maker, but there's a difference between peace making and fence sitting. Sometimes when I see people just being irreverent to other people just for the fun of it, it really pisses me off and I just want to punish them for it. Negative emotional reinforcement for them, you know? and if it wasn't me hurt, it would have just been someone else. how long have you been Christian and are you strong? i think there's something about society in the US especially, where basically, a lot of people don't know what they believe (not just specifically refering to religion. politically, value system, philisophically, etc), and since there's a lot of pressure to be "cool", people just end up resorting to being superficial on some level without a firm spiritual foothold if u know what i mean. Most of my friends are great, but still, I tend to easily spot and appreciate people who know waht they believe in, because i feel i can trust these people more easily, and it's like, something really deserving of respect nowadays to believe in something.. uh... some people are like spider silk in floating in teh wind and i'll be there for them, but when they sink, i don't want to get pulled under w/ them, and plus, i get weird vibes from them. [/rant]
International chess studied more? Maybe, but I don't know if you guys know... Chinese chess has been dissected and analyzed too. There are documented openings, analyses, mid game strategies, and common end games. It's just that a lot of these resources are in Chinese.
If you want to look at the 10,000+ openings, check this site:
An Introduction to Chinese Chess by (Terence) Peter Donnelly Author of Hsiang Ch’i: The Chinese Game of Chess (1974)
Chinese Chess, or xiangqi, is perhaps the most popular board game in the world, played by millions of people in China, other parts of Asia, and wherever Chinese have settled. In recent years it has started to become better known among non-Chinese. Westernized sets of boards and pieces sometimes show up in specialty games shops, and there have been several computer versions. But this wonderful game is still not as well known as it deserves to be.
For sheer fun, it’s hard to think of a two-player board game that matches Chinese chess. It exercises the brain in much the same way as Western (international) chess, but it is much faster moving. The movement of the pieces tends to be more fluid, the positions more open. It might be said that Chinese chess is more a tactical game than a strategic one. In a sense, it is all "middle game." There is no careful buildup of pawn structures, the major pieces come into play immediately, and drawn-out endgames are rare. Although the openings have been classified, my sense (as a pure amateur) is that it is possible to become a good player without a lot of rote learning.
[The students ought to be cautious about the strategic versus tactical game aspect in comparing Chinese Chess versus Western Chess. Mr. Donnelly's statement of Chinese Chess is 'all "middle game"' is not because of that Chinese Chess prevents a player to think strategically and build up a careful defense structure, rather it is because of that the Chinese Chess allows faster engagement (pieces tend to move more fluidly and positions are more open, less pawns to block the positions...), hence a careful defense structure (as usually done in Western Chess) can be easily interrupted by the fast engagement from the opponent. The Western Chess has eight pawns and placed in close proximity of the king lends itself to make more defensive positioning. The Chinese Chess, with its King confined in a castle square guarded by the confined bishops (also called mandarins) and the defensive movement-restricted elephants (also called ministers), does not require as much attention as Western Chess in setting up a defense. The castling of the king with either rook on the chess board unique in the Western Chess opens a lot more possibilities of setting up a defense as well as vulnerability of the king to be attacked. Since the placements of the pieces in Western Chess does not allow any fast attack (more pawns and all pieces are placed at the base two rows of the chess board, fast winning attack is difficult; fast trading is possible which tend to make the game a long drawn defensive game), it is natural for players to make careful initial moves to settle up a defense oriented strategy rather than an attack oriented strategy.]
[As to the learning to become a good player, studying game patterns is the best way whether studying alone or by playing with a better player in both Chinese Chess and Western Chess. It is true that the opening game patterns in Chinese Chess are few to dwell on (as they are easily dictated by the opponent's offensive moves, less so in Western Chess) but its middle games and end games are just as challenging if not more difficult to study as the Western Chess.]
When you spoke of my constant C, you refered to chinese chess being a simpler game. I think this is along the lines of how chinese chess can be "solved" more easily relative to classical chess. Though this is a valid point, I think our arguments aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Until chinese chess is definately solved, you can spend 60 hours a week mastering it and still be beat by someone spending 80 hours a week. We can agree that 60 hr/week is hard, no? and that you can still lose to someone of 80 hr/wk, no? Even though for the 2-4 hour long game, your analysis may not be as strategy oriented, you'll be busting your brain to figure out how to win in any way, and still lose. the fact that it chinese chess doesn't make a difference. Competition is the truth for chinese chess, classical, go, or anything. ^___^.
When you spoke of my constant C, you refered to chinese chess being a simpler game. I think this is along the lines of how chinese chess can be "solved" more easily relative to classical chess. Though this is a valid point, I think our arguments aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Until chinese chess is definately solved, you can spend 60 hours a week mastering it and still be beat by someone spending 80 hours a week. We can agree that 60 hr/week is hard, no? and that you can still lose to someone of 80 hr/wk, no? Even though for the 2-4 hour long game, your analysis may not be as strategy oriented, you'll be busting your brain to figure out how to win in any way, and still lose. the fact that it chinese chess doesn't make a difference. Competition is the truth for chinese chess, classical, go, or anything. ^___^.
cool, so chinese chess has more variations than classical chess. I'm not sure how much sense that makes for me intuitively, but perhaps because the pieces are more fluid in chinese chess, strategies and tactics can keep changing and the midgame can potentially last longer by recycling, whereas in classical chess, when a strategy descends into tactics, it's hard to get back into closed strategy cause things tend to just blow open. [/theorycraft]
in chinese chess, anything can happen in the late-mid game, but in classical chess, in the end it's way more obvious to find out the winner. u can't calculate so much in chinese chess late game, because there are so many variations. but in classical chess late game is mostly about calculation.
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.paulburgess.org/images/chinese-chess.jpg)
9kyu on KGS
![[image loading]](http://files.myopera.com/shemok/albums/20945/new.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.chessvariants.com/shogi.dir/shogiban.gif)
![[image loading]](http://computer-shogi-live.cocolog-nifty.com/photos/uncategorized/7_ryubona_138.gif)
