Enter Your Reply The Comment You're Replying To George Duke wrote on Fri, Feb 25, 2011 01:12 PM EST:This thread has only five comments for anything Betza said. Betza uses ''gnohmon'' without identification, and probably those all belong to Betza. I started this and have not gone through most ''gnohmon'' yet from 2000-2003. Provisionally, I think Betza stayed on 64 squares, avoided 80 or 81 or 100, and 90, because to his satisfaction he had found the next chess, or he decided to act that way consistently for the rest of us: http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=614. More Betza thoughts are in articles than are in comments, and they could belong linked this thread too. Being 80 squares, Outrigger(2002) is his only regular cv of those above sizes. Does Betza ever use Xiangqi or Shogi piece-types on 64 squares? Affirmative. In fact, many of the types -- but he never uses Cannon! -- and they need re-locating for this context. One example is Shogi promoted Bishop, Dragon Horse, found in Betza's Augmented Chess as the same (Bishop + Wazir). Betza implementations from Xiangqi and Shogi never rise to level of ''variant of xiangqi/shogi'' as that has come to be understood by the usa/british crowd of re-workers in that art medium. In historical background, Betza just stopped at around 150 cvs mid-2003. Incidentally, around that same number 150 cvs five years later, Gilman said he would start cutting back output, in consideration of repetitiveness, but 'Gilmans' are nearing 250 now. It may also be interesting here to explore comparison of Betza and Boyer and Betza and Parton. This is legitimate topic thread for ''anything Betza.'' Edit Form You may not post a new comment, because ItemID RalphBetzaSpeaks does not match any item.