19096 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?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
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!
Former FIDE Champion Rustam Kasimdzhanov proposed to FIDE that they should abolish draws, with full details here http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7469
I don't agree with this at all, but I wondered what all of you think about this.
Monster_with_no_Name will be in his elements with this topic
I don't like the idea of if the game doesn't have a decisive result than rapid followed by blitz tie breaks will occur. Do we really want the super tournaments to be decided by blitz games?
I love this idea. you still get all the beauty of chess but pgn files of "one game" might include 5 games! i think his solution is a bit unrealistic though, he was on the right track with the comparison to tennis. in most tourny's the max time is 6hours (40 moves in 2 hours per player then 1 one hour per player=max of 6 is pretty standard.) instead of having one game with a 6-hour time limit have have a "best of three" G/6 (all three games in one time control!!(not per each game..) this will make people seiously re-think there time use strategies!). you sit down and get white, and you win but if you use 4 hours to do and black only used 1 to lose you might be in trouble in the next game! thats just another idea to think about because his was simplistic.
this is just ridiculous. the elite draw against each other because they are equally matched and neither side can win, so making them play blitz is useless. Unless the time controls are inhumanely quick, both players should still draw each other. Not only this, but this makes masters prepare for two different time controls, overall reducing the quality of the game. And for less experienced players, this unfairly favors players who are skilled at blitz but only lucky enough to get a draw against an opponent who is better with standard time controls...
Although I do support the idea of weighing wins a little more than twice draws (perhaps 2 for win, 0.5 for draw and 0 for loss), making the draw nonexistent is completely absurd...
Like the London Chess Classic, which uses the 3 point system, 3 for win, 1 for draw, 0 for loss. Under that scoring, 3 draws would equal a win instead of 2.
The money-saving scheme of the candidates matches have broken down so now he needs a new way to keep the price of renting venues down.
Both schemes increased the importance of blitz games over standard ones and decreased the amount of time tournaments would actually take.
Is chess a sport? Ending the debate
by KnightNinja33 3 minutes ago
9/29/2016 - Occupying The Escape Square
by Mohamed_18 4 minutes ago
How to become more tactically aware as a beginner?
by 0110001101101000 11 minutes ago
A unique portable wood chessboard
by bborkowski 14 minutes ago
by edmundo51 19 minutes ago
Chess Clubs in Barcelona
by sosofy 25 minutes ago
by thegreat_patzer 28 minutes ago
chess is a game of missed opportunities
by zembrianator 36 minutes ago
New Version Feedback
by Another-Life 38 minutes ago
Content of My Suggestion Ticket
by e4exclusive 40 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
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!