3 ms·

There are promising chess variants where all draws are eliminated: no black castling or no black short-castling Armageddon (draws are counted as wins for black)

by in3d 6y ago

There are promising chess variants where all draws are eliminated: no black castling or no black short-castling Armageddon (draws are counted as wins for black). I wish they would test them instead of their picks - they are still chess unlike some variants they tested, which are probably too radical if you want to attract current chess players.

me_me_me 6y ago
I got back to chess few years back, and following scene a bit. The classical long for chess is basically dead. Its boring, with majority draws (close to solved game - de0incentivizing aggressive play). I am glad there is shift towards shorter time formats. Shorter time control creates more urgency and allows to play subpar moves to throw off your opponent. Its much more interesting to observe. Armagedon rules are being used now as tie breakers and there is a lot more discussion about changes/rules tweaks. So who knows what next year will bring.
- dh5 6y ago
  I strongly disagree with the assertion that chess is a "close to solved game" in human OTB play in particular. Top GMs currently will probably score 0/12 against Leela/Stockfish. We see innovations frequently in recent years as we learn from engines themselves, h4/h5 pushes as a simple example, but also in terms of style like favoring rapid development and attacking play. Yes, draws are frequent but that doesn't mean there is no excitement in long games. Rapid/blitz is damn fun to watch and play but there's a certain, different kind of elegance in carefully considered moves as well.
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    > I strongly disagree with the assertion that chess is a "close to solved game" in human OTB play in particular. I meant 90min +30mins classical format. It really is stale and boring to watch. And it seems like its mainly a memory game with some meta counter preparations pre-tournament. Where you develop and memorize lines to counter your opponent. That's what I meant by "close to solved game" - as both players are almost role playing for first 20-30 moves. With tiny variations throughout the tournament. That results in quite uneventful games, usually same line being played in multiple games. Anyhow that's just an opinion, if someone enjoys classical more power to them.
    - gowld 6y ago
      Slow chess is not solved by any human; it's broken. It's dead-ended because some better players avoid aggression so they can play short-time tiebreakers instead.
      - me_me_me 6y ago
        agreed - 'solved' is wrong term. Maybe peaked to the point top players are almost equal.
    - bjourne 6y ago
      Agreed. Also seem to be not enough incentive to win games. E.g. if Magnus Carlsen thinks he can probably win, he'd settle for a draw if that is the safer alternative. Perhaps it could be changed so that wins count for three points and draws only one. No idea if that would encourage players to become more aggressive.
__s 6y ago
Draws aren't something that need to be eliminated. There are beautiful draws. Only issue is when draws become too easy (for varying definition of easy). Even today, & even for computers, draws are not too easy. But they are getting easier

by in3d 6y ago

me_me_me 6y ago

I got back to chess few years back, and following scene a bit. The classical long for chess is basically dead. Its boring, with majority draws (close to solved game - de0incentivizing aggressive play). I am glad there is shift towards shorter time formats. Shorter time control creates more urgency and allows to play subpar moves to throw off your opponent. Its much more interesting to observe. Armagedon rules are being used now as tie breakers and there is a lot more discussion about changes/rules tweaks. So who knows what next year will bring.

dh5 6y ago
I strongly disagree with the assertion that chess is a "close to solved game" in human OTB play in particular. Top GMs currently will probably score 0/12 against Leela/Stockfish. We see innovations frequently in recent years as we learn from engines themselves, h4/h5 pushes as a simple example, but also in terms of style like favoring rapid development and attacking play. Yes, draws are frequent but that doesn't mean there is no excitement in long games. Rapid/blitz is damn fun to watch and play but there's a certain, different kind of elegance in carefully considered moves as well.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  > I strongly disagree with the assertion that chess is a "close to solved game" in human OTB play in particular. I meant 90min +30mins classical format. It really is stale and boring to watch. And it seems like its mainly a memory game with some meta counter preparations pre-tournament. Where you develop and memorize lines to counter your opponent. That's what I meant by "close to solved game" - as both players are almost role playing for first 20-30 moves. With tiny variations throughout the tournament. That results in quite uneventful games, usually same line being played in multiple games. Anyhow that's just an opinion, if someone enjoys classical more power to them.
  - gowld 6y ago
    Slow chess is not solved by any human; it's broken. It's dead-ended because some better players avoid aggression so they can play short-time tiebreakers instead.
    - me_me_me 6y ago
      agreed - 'solved' is wrong term. Maybe peaked to the point top players are almost equal.
  - bjourne 6y ago
    Agreed. Also seem to be not enough incentive to win games. E.g. if Magnus Carlsen thinks he can probably win, he'd settle for a draw if that is the safer alternative. Perhaps it could be changed so that wins count for three points and draws only one. No idea if that would encourage players to become more aggressive.

__s 6y ago

Draws aren't something that need to be eliminated. There are beautiful draws. Only issue is when draws become too easy (for varying definition of easy). Even today, & even for computers, draws are not too easy. But they are getting easier