Body: <p>What is the name and detailed rules of the chess variant where the first person to lose all their pieces wins.</p>
  
  <p>Unfortunately, I'm not sure about the rest of the rules. Are there force captures, or checkmates, etc?</p>
  
  <p>Does anybody know the complete set of rules?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-10-31T00:44:04.537Z
Comments.Text: That sounds like suicide or loser's chess.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Herb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-10-31T13:12:24.353Z
Comments.Text: @HerbWolfe It probably is, with a different name. Do you know the full rules?
Comments.UserDisplayName: TheAsh
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-10-31T14:09:43.277Z
Comments.Text: It's not officially recognized by FIDE or the USCF, so there aren't any official rules. A simple google search should turn up the most common rules.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Herb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-01T02:41:28.897Z
Comments.Text: Have edited question text to remove Chinese Chess red herring. Not really clear why post was put on hold as off-topic. Question was confused but obviously related to a very common variant of chess, which is definitely on-topic. Maybe someone can explain to me.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Laska
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-01T13:27:16.270Z
Comments.Text: I seem to have found a good answer in this question here... https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/15532/chess-variation-where-the-goal-is-to-lose-all-pieces?rq=1
Comments.UserDisplayName: TheAsh
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-02T17:50:20.643Z
Comments.Text: Please can some moderator take the hold off this question now that the text is changed thanks
Comments.UserDisplayName: Laska
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-02T19:41:42.907Z
Comments.Text: @Laska I think it's still somewhat poorly worded, and improving it would require pretty much a re-write, then it would be a dupe, as pointed out by the OP.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Herb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-03T00:37:35.070Z
Comments.Text: @Herb thanks for explanation. But quality of writing and duplication don’t make the problem off-topic. And in fact it never was off-topic, which is my only point. The current reason given for the hold is confusing and reduces confidence in the process. Thanks for your time.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Laska
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-03T16:22:12.497Z
Comments.Text: Unclear writing can easily make a question off topic. It is very common to have questions too broad to be answered, and thus off topic. For example if someone is concerned about a single sub-variant and the question is phrased such that it engulfs all the possible sub-variants, it is reasonable to flag and delete as off topic.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Pablo S. Ocal
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-11-12T17:58:06.003Z
Comments.Text: It is called antichess.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Wais Kamal
Tags: <chess-variants>
Title: What are the rules of chess variant?
ThreadText: # What are the rules of chess variant?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2017-10-30)
  
  What is the name and detailed rules of the chess variant where the first person to lose all their pieces wins.
  
  Unfortunately, I'm not sure about the rest of the rules. Are there force captures, or checkmates, etc?
  
  Does anybody know the complete set of rules?
  
  **Tags:** chess-variants
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: That sounds like suicide or loser's chess.  
  > **username_0**: @HerbWolfe It probably is, with a different name. Do you know the full rules?  
  > **username_1**: It's not officially recognized by FIDE or the USCF, so there aren't any official rules. A simple google search should turn up the most common rules.  
  > **username_2**: Have edited question text to remove Chinese Chess red herring. Not really clear why post was put on hold as off-topic. Question was confused but obviously related to a very common variant of chess, which is definitely on-topic. Maybe someone can explain to me.  
  > **username_0**: I seem to have found a good answer in this question here... https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/15532/chess-variation-where-the-goal-is-to-lose-all-pieces?rq=1  
  > **username_2**: Please can some moderator take the hold off this question now that the text is changed thanks  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 I think it's still somewhat poorly worded, and improving it would require pretty much a re-write, then it would be a dupe, as pointed out by the OP.  
  > **username_2**: @username_1 thanks for explanation. But quality of writing and duplication don’t make the problem off-topic. And in fact it never was off-topic, which is my only point. The current reason given for the hold is confusing and reduces confidence in the process. Thanks for your time.  
  > **username_3**: Unclear writing can easily make a question off topic. It is very common to have questions too broad to be answered, and thus off topic. For example if someone is concerned about a single sub-variant and the question is phrased such that it engulfs all the possible sub-variants, it is reasonable to flag and delete as off topic.  
  > **username_4**: It is called antichess.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  