14809 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
It seems like black and white would be much more equal if the starting two square pawn advance option was removed from the game. If White wants to play the equivalent of e4, it takes him two moves to do so, and black can now play two development moves in exchange for white's control of the center as compensation. Has this ever been considered before?
What's wrong with how pawns move now? Why is slowing down the game better?
You'll have to answer those questions for anyone to even entertain the idea.
Actually, for hundreds of years, pawns could only move one square. Several hundred years ago they added the "2 squares on the first move" rule so the pawns could get into the game faster, since it was thought it took to long for the battle to start. If you want to get center control as black, just play 1...e5 or 1...c5 in response to e4.
The problem is that White starts with an advantage due to the way pawns move now: "Statistical analysis shows that White scores between 52 and 56 percent at most levels of play, with White's margin increasing as the standard of play improves."
I realize there are things black can do, but that doesn't chane the fact that at very high levels of play white generally plays for a win, and black for a draw, simply because white starts out with a slight tempo advantage. Allowing double pawn moves exacerbates this advantage. I know it would slow the game down a bit, but it seems to me that game balance should take precedence over a slight speed improvement.
Dude, black can move pawns two squares also. Taking away that option for both sides would result in the same exact thing. White will always be slightly better than Black unless you give black some unfair advantage (a special move that white can't do, an extra piece, etc.) Someone has to go first.
How to improve from 1200?
by TheGreatOogieBoogie 2 minutes ago
The queen sac & blundering after that
by achja 3 minutes ago
Playing extra-ordinary openings for more fun
by Mechkov 7 minutes ago
Am I too late to become a master?
by sonseray 8 minutes ago
Ponziani: Impractical in non-computer Correspondence Chess?
by kantifields 10 minutes ago
Opening repertoire 4 patzers Best ones to get playable positions and quick wins!
by Till_98 13 minutes ago
Can someone please identify this opening? (beginner question)
by tmkroll 14 minutes ago
Bumping Old Threads
by kayak21 16 minutes ago
Ruth Haring: 'Girls are bad at chess'
by Azukikuru 16 minutes ago
How many USCF national master are there?
by Zigwurst 18 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!