UrAvgAzn wrote:
Kk, I'm back. And if you have a thought to add to my idea, you should post it. Syntax, if you think I am a failure at Future Requests, just say it. Its not like I would feel sad, I don't even know you.
-Jeremy
EDIT: Syntax, I'm pretty sure its spelled misspelled.
Ok... I was being light-hearted.
I don't think anything or one is a failure. One even more so than anything. I apologise if you thought I was being condescending in any way.
The camel idea was in fact based (not on an earlier version of chess) on that book by Karpov (I believe, and too late to check google). Anyways, this book was a lot of ideas laid out on "
how to make chess more difficult"
but only introduced conditional motion... like the camel. As far as I remember (this was 15 years back), the camel could move 3,3 knight like moves but that depended on entourage of other pieces. Thinking about it, it may have been Fisher.
Anyways... underlying motion was the fact that just as chess is self-complete, DROD is too, and for something to make it as a new concept, it needs to be a new concept. "
The middle of the snake"
assumes, for example, an odd-lengthed snake... and you want it to behave like red snakes and shrink in a dead end? What happens to the placement of the heart then?
As far as the word misspelled is spelt, spelled is as acceptable a version as spelt and dicken's hinmself uses the apostophe -ed version.
Anyways... all this to say that I do apologise if I came across harshly. I am harsh but fair. Ideas are good...