Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Who crosses the river first?. A variant on Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Terrica wrote on Wed, Oct 20, 2004 12:06 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

Dear Stephen Leary,


  What I found on the internet about your game is Excellent, but I am
doing research on the board game, Who crosses the River First, and I need
a little more information about you.
To turn in for a grade.

🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Oct 20, 2004 02:51 AM UTC:

Stephen Leary reported about this game in a FAQ at least eight years ago, but he did not invent it. It appears to be an ancient Xiang Qi variant of unknown origin. It is unlikely that Stephen Leary will read your message in time to respond, since he is not involved with this website, and we don't even have current contact information on him. I can't tell you anything about him myself, because I know nothing about him.

Anonymous wrote on Mon, Dec 12, 2005 09:11 PM UTC:

Whould you please explain more about this because I am doing a project on the game!

Anonymous wrote on Tue, Mar 28, 2006 09:51 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

This is pretty good except that i need more information because i am doing a project on this game. This is the only website about Who Crosses The River First and you dont have very much information. You should get more about this game....

Avweek wrote on Tue, Mar 28, 2006 10:24 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

I think this is a pretty good website but i need more info about the jumping over other pieces and capturing of pieces. Can any of the editors answer this????? I really need to know. Its for school.

Jeremy Good wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 12:18 AM UTC:

Why does this game seem to be getting assigned as a school project again and again?

Anonymous wrote on Thu, Mar 22, 2007 11:17 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

told me just what i needed to know about chineese chess

Anonymous wrote on Wed, Apr 9, 2008 12:41 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

fgaf wrote on Tue, Jan 13, 2009 06:18 PM UTC:Poor ★

No info at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

John Smith wrote on Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13 AM UTC:

Yes, I, too would like the answer to this question!!!!

Jean-Louis Cazaux wrote on Sun, Mar 15, 2009 08:57 PM UTC:

This variant is the winner of 'The Most Mysterious Chess Variant Ever' Award!
Incredible that after all these years nothing has emerged, not even a Chinese name!
About the rules, it is strange that to say that there is no capturing whereas capture is mentionned for the Artillery.
Let's pray we know one day.

Flowerman wrote on Sat, Mar 13, 2010 08:51 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

Good game, but i have one question: there written that artillery moves like Korean cannon. But in Korean chess cannon can't leap over anther cannon. Can it leap over another artillery here?

Daniil Frolov wrote on Thu, May 13, 2010 09:48 AM UTC:

I think, he told 'it goes any number of squares horizontally or vertically, but must always jump exactly one piece whether it captures or not' just because he was comparing it with Korean cannon (as contrary to Chinese cannon), and did not mean that it actually do captures. But there still is one uncertain thing (see my previous comment). It's interesting that bishop in Shatar, Mongolian-Buryat chess (it's rules are pretty close to modern European chess), is also called camel!

13 comments displayed

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.