lichess.org
Donate

Would anyone like to try playing three checks crazyhouse on lichess against me?

I was wanting to try playing a cross between three checks and crazyhouse on lichess. We could play it by playing a crazyhouse game with the agreement that whoever gets checked three times first must resign.
Too crazy!!
Seriously though, the games would be over in 5 seconds and White would win 80% of the time.
That wouldn't be fun anymore. You would be scared to even play 1. e4, and opening up the position is a sure loss. Both variants have their own special ideas and strategies. When combined the games are short and white's advantage would probably be pretty huge.

For example, exchanging pieces. You opponent recaptures, and then you check with the piece you earned. They move, and you exchange again, then check, then they move, and you exchange...

This does not all have to happen at one time, but any move opening the position is a sure loss, isn't it?

White's initiative means that if he plays aggressive it is a sure win for him.
I predict white can force a win, but sure, let's play.

1. e4.
I changed a few lines of code in Stockfish to make a hacky 3-check crazyhouse Stockfish (surprisingly it did not crash so far). Its evaluation currently says:
1. e3: +10
1. e4: -5
For 1.f3 and 1.f4 it already shows a mate score with black winning in less than 10 moves.
@ubdip (#7)

Yeah, I think 1. e4 opens up the position a bit too much - in Crazyhouse Three-Check, not even castling will do you much good. Building a fortress with 7 pawns might be helpful though (3 pawns originally yours, 3 captured pawns, and an extra pawn from any team).
@InnateAluminum I'd be surprised if it even got to capturing 3 pawns, let alone drop them, let alone defensively.

Let's see how e4 gets refuted :)

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.