Well, there already are many chess variants. But this little different chess you invented could also make some games more interesting, that's right.
Chess is boring! Let's change the rules
Sort:
Armageddon rules seem to have put some excitement back into top-level games. White must win, or else. Black gets less time, but wins with a draw.
It generally forces White to play for some sort of risky imbalances, or else he'll suffer a slow-draw death ...
Optimissed wrote:
Oh I didn't notice you altered the positions of the K and Q. I don't know what effect that has but now you're saying that both sides castle on the same side. Tbh perhaps you should leave the positions of the K and Q as normal.
They both make a short castle on a different side. White short castle on the kingside. Black short castle on the queenside.
I made it so to have more imbalances from the start and make it easy and natural to castle in opposite direction. If you just say: "One side can make long caste and the other short castle" the problem is that it's way easier to short castle.
MaetsNori wrote:
Armageddon rules seem to have put some excitement back into top-level games. White must win, or else. Black gets less time, but wins with a draw.
It generally forces White to play for some sort of risky imbalances, or else he'll suffer a slow-draw death ...
This is true and it work in shorter time control.
But for classical chess it's very difficult to play with imabalances against an opponent that want a peaceful: "You have to be 2 to play a game"
finnsteur wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Oh I didn't notice you altered the positions of the K and Q. I don't know what effect that has but now you're saying that both sides castle on the same side. Tbh perhaps you should leave the positions of the K and Q as normal.
They both make a short castle on a different side. White short castle on the kingside. Black short castle on the queenside.
I made it so to have more imbalances from the start and make it easy and natural to castle in opposite direction. If you just say: "One side can make long caste and the other short castle" the problem is that it's way easier to short castle.
You said that black castles Q side in your description. Black is castling K-side too, except the Kings are on different sides. That's why I was confused, apart from being 107 years old or thereabouts.
Jan 5, 2024
0
#27
Chess needs to be a draw with best play. That way the only way for a decisive chess game is for it to be because of human error, which makes it a better game. It is unfair if black plays at 100% accuracy and white also plays at 100% accuracy, but white still wins. It much rather play see two grandmasters draw a ton then know that one of them is doomed to lose no matter how well they play.
Jan 5, 2024
0
#28
Your never change the rules on chess.com or any other site, rules setting concrete for thousands of years, live the game or take up tiddly winks, or jigsaw puzzles!!???
NotMagnusCarlesn wrote:
Chess needs to be a draw with best play. That way the only way for a decisive chess game is for it to be because of human error, which makes it a better game. It is unfair if black plays at 100% accuracy and white also plays at 100% accuracy, but white still wins. It much rather play see two grandmasters draw a ton then know that one of them is doomed to lose no matter how well they play.
Don't worry in shogi all games are decisive thanks to the rules in place and black win almost as much game as white!
In fact shogi AND this new version of chess are draw too. But not the same kind of draw. They're more like combative draw. With attack everywhere.
Jan 5, 2024
0
#30
the-blonde-cat wrote:
the OP has a point.
white first is a bit supremist but who am i to complain haha.
Not the "chess is racist" claim again. It's not a sign of supremacy, it's how the game was made. In most games a certain color goes first every time.
Jan 5, 2024
0
#31
This is a great idea, though, and would be very interesting to play.
Jan 5, 2024
0
#32
finnsteur wrote:
NotMagnusCarlesn wrote:
Chess needs to be a draw with best play. That way the only way for a decisive chess game is for it to be because of human error, which makes it a better game. It is unfair if black plays at 100% accuracy and white also plays at 100% accuracy, but white still wins. It much rather play see two grandmasters draw a ton then know that one of them is doomed to lose no matter how well they play.
Don't worry in shogi all games are decisive thanks to the rules in place and black win almost as much game as white!
In fact shogi AND this new version of chess are draw too. But not the same kind of draw. They're more like combative draw. With attack everywhere.
Chess is more interesting if it's more than just attacking.
NotMagnusCarlesn wrote:
finnsteur wrote:
NotMagnusCarlesn wrote:
Chess needs to be a draw with best play. That way the only way for a decisive chess game is for it to be because of human error, which makes it a better game. It is unfair if black plays at 100% accuracy and white also plays at 100% accuracy, but white still wins. It much rather play see two grandmasters draw a ton then know that one of them is doomed to lose no matter how well they play.
Don't worry in shogi all games are decisive thanks to the rules in place and black win almost as much game as white!
In fact shogi AND this new version of chess are draw too. But not the same kind of draw. They're more like combative draw. With attack everywhere.
Chess is more interesting if it's more than just attacking.
I see your point.
Chess would still be lots of things. Attacking would just always be an option (and a good one).
I think you can play positionally even in opposite side castling position. You can try to exchange queens, open a file and exchange all rooks on it etc...
There could be clash of style here too.
After playing about 4000 5 mins games in the past year I'm finally starting to get some of my old form from the mid 90s back, although I'll never again be as good as I was then. It must be upsetting to see someone with a blitz rating of 1450 playing like this. Don't think I put a foot wrong.
The Q can capture the R. That would probably slow the mate down. Not sure but forcing moves seemed best.
I know. It were gud.
The problem with modern chess is not that it's boring, but everything is booked out and all the grandmasters train with computers. That's why Bobby Fischer invented FischerChess or RandomChess or whatever they call it now. Opening theory is thrown out the Plus, there are a lot of variant chess games here on Chess.com. Just go to "Play" then select "4 Player & Variants"
It’s be more fair if white was the one to have to castle O-O-O
This is where chess 960 comes to the rescue. You have all the chess rules including castling without the memorizing of openings. If the upcoming classical Fischer-Random super-tournament in February results in a high percentage of wins without a majority of draws then it will prove that memorizing the openings are what makes chess boring at the elite levels of chess. In the lower levels there has never been a problem with constant draws.
Oh I didn't notice you altered the positions of the K and Q. I don't know what effect that has but now you're saying that both sides castle on the same side. Tbh perhaps you should leave the positions of the K and Q as normal.