3 ms·

It's hard to change a game that's so old, but draws shouldn't be allowed, only stalemates. Imagine if the Lakers played the Warriors, and late in the 4th quar

It's hard to change a game that's so old, but draws shouldn't be allowed, only stalemates. Imagine if the Lakers played the Warriors, and late in the 4th quarter, the game is tied, and LeBron and Curry decide they are tired, declare a draw and go to their locker rooms. Not particularly satisfying.

Retra 8y ago
Your analogy doesn't make sense. In basketball, if your opponent gets tired, that gives you a better opportunity to win. In chess, if the game nears the end and neither of you can see a way to win, then there's no good opportunity. Your analogy would make more sense to say the basketball game was tied and there are three seconds left on the clock and both players have broken wrists. Playing three seconds of game to risk injury is not worth it for either player. It also doesn't mean the game was unexciting.
- dwd 8y ago
  In a championship match tiredness and losing focus is a big deal. A lot of draws are simply not wanting to risk burning out when there are more games to go. Saying that, Carlson once had a reputation for not agreeing on a draw and being able to maintain focus while his opponent faded and made a mistake.
umanwizard 8y ago
You shouldn't comment so confidently about something you don't understand. The position is drawn. There was no way for either side to win.
- russellbeattie 8y ago
  You shouldn't comment so snarkily to someone you don't know. I understand what a drawn position is, however players will regularly agree to a draw well before it actually happens. They choose to draw because of potential drawn positions. There's no reason for a game not to continue until there is an actual stalemate (or a set of similar circumstances, like a situation in which checkmate is impossible), or a blunder by one of the opponents.
  - umanwizard 8y ago
    > I understand what a drawn position is To make this more concrete, the following link is a drawn position (it is trivially easy for either side to avoid checkmate, indefinitely) http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=---k-------------------------------------------------------KNN-- http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=---k------------------... However, checkmate is still possible (White can checkmate Black if Black makes severe blunders that even beginners probably wouldn't make) Do you think the players should be forced to play on here?
    - russellbeattie 8y ago
      Yes! Or black should resign. And in addition, they have clocks for a reason - though time is added indefinitely at the end (if a player moves fast enough) - if a player takes an hour more than an opponent (like Carlsen did in the middle of game 8) they should start to feel the pressure of that more severely.
      - umanwizard 8y ago
        Why do you think Black should lose here? Why is Black's position worse than White's ? If your answer is "White has more material", keep in mind that chess is not about material; it is about checkmate. But, nevertheless, here's an example with equal material where checkmate is possible for both sides, but not without blunders. Who should have to resign here? http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=--------------------k-------p-------P-------K------------------- http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=--------------------k-... If you really insist on saying "well yes, they should have to keep moving the kings around aimlessly for hours until somebody's clock runs out", you're proposing a game that is so fundamentally unlike chess that it should probably be given a different name.
billfruit 8y ago
Perhaps a doubling cube can be used like in backgammon, ie, one player can up the ante, in a draw-ish situation. Ie, staring at a draw, one player says: let's play for a win, but at double the points, if the other player accepts game continues. If other player rejects the doubling, he is considered to have conceded the game at the original 1pt stake.

Retra 8y ago

Your analogy doesn't make sense. In basketball, if your opponent gets tired, that gives you a better opportunity to win. In chess, if the game nears the end and neither of you can see a way to win, then there's no good opportunity. Your analogy would make more sense to say the basketball game was tied and there are three seconds left on the clock and both players have broken wrists. Playing three seconds of game to risk injury is not worth it for either player. It also doesn't mean the game was unexciting.

dwd 8y ago
In a championship match tiredness and losing focus is a big deal. A lot of draws are simply not wanting to risk burning out when there are more games to go. Saying that, Carlson once had a reputation for not agreeing on a draw and being able to maintain focus while his opponent faded and made a mistake.

umanwizard 8y ago

You shouldn't comment so confidently about something you don't understand. The position is drawn. There was no way for either side to win.

russellbeattie 8y ago
You shouldn't comment so snarkily to someone you don't know. I understand what a drawn position is, however players will regularly agree to a draw well before it actually happens. They choose to draw because of potential drawn positions. There's no reason for a game not to continue until there is an actual stalemate (or a set of similar circumstances, like a situation in which checkmate is impossible), or a blunder by one of the opponents.
- umanwizard 8y ago
  > I understand what a drawn position is To make this more concrete, the following link is a drawn position (it is trivially easy for either side to avoid checkmate, indefinitely) http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=---k-------------------------------------------------------KNN-- http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=---k------------------... However, checkmate is still possible (White can checkmate Black if Black makes severe blunders that even beginners probably wouldn't make) Do you think the players should be forced to play on here?
  - russellbeattie 8y ago
    Yes! Or black should resign. And in addition, they have clocks for a reason - though time is added indefinitely at the end (if a player moves fast enough) - if a player takes an hour more than an opponent (like Carlsen did in the middle of game 8) they should start to feel the pressure of that more severely.
    - umanwizard 8y ago
      Why do you think Black should lose here? Why is Black's position worse than White's ? If your answer is "White has more material", keep in mind that chess is not about material; it is about checkmate. But, nevertheless, here's an example with equal material where checkmate is possible for both sides, but not without blunders. Who should have to resign here? http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=--------------------k-------p-------P-------K------------------- http://www.jinchess.com/chessboard/?p=--------------------k-... If you really insist on saying "well yes, they should have to keep moving the kings around aimlessly for hours until somebody's clock runs out", you're proposing a game that is so fundamentally unlike chess that it should probably be given a different name.

billfruit 8y ago

Perhaps a doubling cube can be used like in backgammon, ie, one player can up the ante, in a draw-ish situation. Ie, staring at a draw, one player says: let's play for a win, but at double the points, if the other player accepts game continues. If other player rejects the doubling, he is considered to have conceded the game at the original 1pt stake.