Talk:Alquerque

Untitled
I want to know what others think about the "Bell" rules, I've read through them but I don't really see why they need to exist. However I've included them for completeness.

The first "A piece cannot move backwards" along with the third "Once a piece has reached the final line it can only move while capturing opponent pieces.", would seem to be a rule that just results in stalemates with most pieces ending up stuck.

The second "No piece can return to a point where it has been before" just seems impractical, having to remember all of the previous moves, I wonder if Bell actually meant that you can't return to the position that you just came from.

Also the second way of winning, "None of the opponents pieces are able to move", I've tried playign with Alfonso rules and it seems to me that with the original rules a draw is impossible, I can see no situation where it could occur.

-- Imran Ghory

The rules given in this article are extremely vague and incomplete. Most importantly (in my opinion) it does not state what happens when a player is faced with a position in which two (or more) pieces can make a capture: &mdash; Timwi 16:59, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Do both (or all) of these pieces make a capture, thus making several moves in one turn?
 * Does the player get to choose which one of the pieces should make the capture, while the other gets huffed?
 * Does the player get to choose which one of the pieces should make the capture, and the other one stays?

Merels, not alquerque
The articles stated: ''The oldest known board is unfinished and was carved into the roof of the temple at Qurna, Egypt, built around 1400 BC. Friedrich Berger has argued that some of the diagrams at Qurna "cannot be dated" because Coptic crosses, used in the 1st century, are also carved there. ''.

However, as Berger points out, these were merels boards, not those for alquerque. -- Zz (talk) 14:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)