From: Larry Kaufman WIZARD NET> Date: 8 feb 1999 Subject: Re: Chess and shogi -----Original Message----- From: The Shogi Discussion List [mailto:SHOGI-L techunix technion ac il]On Behalf Of 'Ben Bednarz' Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 2:12 PM To: SHOGI-L techunix technion ac il Subject: Re: Chess and shogi That said, I would like to challenge one part of Larry's analysis. I don't think you can expect a game to have early interaction and not need lots of opening memorization. Early interaction, combined with tactics, leads to opening traps and thus to opening memorization. I thought of this, but it need not be true, as shown by the fact that "shuffle chess" has the same interaction as regular chess, but little danger of opening memorization being a problem. Granted, in chess games with a fixed starting position, early interaction and opening theory are highly correlated, but they can differ somewhat. In chess, early interaction forces openings to be important even for beginners. In shogi, one become even a decent amateur 1 dan with little opening knowledge, because interaction develops a little slower. Also because the complexity of the game means that obtaining an opening advantage is less likely to insure victory. Also, I don't know how you would categorize it, but chess has one thing shogi does not: endgames. Well, I mean... shogi has endgames, which are generally violent attacks (white/black to move and win...). But chess has these beautiful endgames involved fewer pieces and elegant concepts. That "chess- style" endgame is missing from shogi, and that is a pity. Both chess and shogi endgames are very interesting. Which one you prefer is purely a matter of individual choice. Ben Bednarz In reply to Mr. Heeffer's comments on "range of proficiency", I agree this is a desirable attribute. However in comparing chess and shogi on this score, the key point is the effect of draws in chess. It is true that I would score much better in percentage terms against Kasparov in chess than against Habu in shogi. In chess our FIDE ratings, which differ by 402 points on the latest list, predict a 9% score for me, which should be accurate. In shogi there are no ELO ratings for the pros (except for one, and that's based solely on handicap play), so we can only guess, but in my opinion I would score only 1 or 2% against Habu in serious shogi games. However, if we disregard all drawn games in chess, I would expect to win only about 2% of the decisive games against Kasparov. So the range of proficiency in chess and in shogi may be similar in some sense, but draws make it appear that the range is smaller in chess. If chess and shogi were played with the rule that all draws must be replayed until a decisive result is obtained (as is the rule in most Pro shogi events and used to be the rule in some chess events a century ago), then the range would be similar, but with draws counting as 1/2 a player must be vastly better than his opponent to score say 80%. I also omitted handicapping from my list of attributes, important because close matches are often hard to arrange. Piece handicaps are used in all the chess variants, but are felt to distort strategy less in shogi than in the other chess games because the simple plan of trading pieces when ahead in material is not very effective in shogi. I do feel that the shogi handicap system could easily be improved; in particular there is too large a gap between lance and bishop handicap. In fact lance handicap, though a very interesting and very instructive game, is not really so suitable for competitive play, because unless the player knows how to make use of the lance handicap, it is as likely as not to prove to be a liability, since the player without the lance can capture your lance while you cannot capture his. I feel that a proper handicap for competitive play should be an unambiguous advantage; some examples would be free moves at the start, an extra pawn or piece in hand, or starting with rook or bishop already promoted. When the extra piece is on the board, if it's a mobile piece like rook or bishop (or a general) it's pretty clearly an advantage, but if it's one with little flexibility like lance or knight it can easily prove to be a liability. I have often played with top level Japanese amateurs at lance handicap, and since I know quite a bit about it I do score better than I would in even games, but I can't escape the feeling that we are playing a different game than normal shogi, one in which the result comes down to whether I can use the lance well in the opening, which in some cases is extremely difficult (if at all possible). I would really have preferred to play with some type of small but unambiguous advantage, if such were accepted as valid in shogi. Larry Kaufman