Chess Is Perfect ( No Updates Needed ! )

Sort:
badenwurtca
bong711 wrote:

Chess isn't perfect. Nobody, nothing is! I propose CHANGES. I propose a deck of cards or electronic random opening generator. It we keep playing from starting position of all pawns on 2nd or 7th rank, many amateur would rely on memorization of opening repertoire. Play only chosen opening and variations. 

   ---   I hate to disagree with you Sir but I will repeat that Chess is perfect  lol.

bong711
badenwurtca wrote:
bong711 wrote:

Chess isn't perfect. Nobody, nothing is! I propose CHANGES. I propose a deck of cards or electronic random opening generator. It we keep playing from starting position of all pawns on 2nd or 7th rank, many amateur would rely on memorization of opening repertoire. Play only chosen opening and variations. 

   ---   I hate to disagree with you Sir but I will repeat that Chess is perfect  lol.

That is your OPINION.

hoodoothere
bong711 wrote:

Chess isn't perfect. Nobody, nothing is! I propose CHANGES. I propose a deck of cards or electronic random opening generator. It we keep playing from starting position of all pawns on 2nd or 7th rank, many amateur would rely on memorization of opening repertoire. Play only chosen opening and variations. 

Have you tried Fischer random, or Chess960 as it is called often? The best player wins unless you have a Eidetic memory or such because it is virtually impossible to memorize the best starting moves.

bong711

I prefer the random opening format used by Engine Tournaments. The starting position are have more room for creative play. It's difficult to be creative in Chess 960 start position. Ofc that is my OPINION.

Jradkins27

Im trying to figure out this 960.

hoodoothere
Jradkins27 wrote:

Im trying to figure out this 960.

Focus on trying to see the strengths and weaknesses of the position you start with to form a plan and get your pieces where they need to be to execute that plan. It can be either a plan of attack or a plan to strengthen your defense, the latter especially if you are black. You also have to react correctly to what your opponent does. It's a good exercise if you are weak on the mid and end game because you don't have to memorize openings, just think for yourself. Anyways that is my opinion.

 

badenwurtca
bong711 wrote:
badenwurtca wrote:
bong711 wrote:

Chess isn't perfect. Nobody, nothing is! I propose CHANGES. I propose a deck of cards or electronic random opening generator. It we keep playing from starting position of all pawns on 2nd or 7th rank, many amateur would rely on memorization of opening repertoire. Play only chosen opening and variations. 

   ---   I hate to disagree with you Sir but I will repeat that Chess is perfect  lol.

That is your OPINION.

Yes exactly ! And of course the reason that I started this thread is so that I could state my opinion here. Yes indeed Classical Chess is quite perfect however some folks do prefer to play other versions of Chess ( eg: Chess 960 or four Player Chess,  etc etc ).   

badenwurtca
badenwurtca wrote:

I notice that someone here wants to change the rules governing draws ( sorry, not happening ).

   ---   Just saw where someone want to get rid of Stalemates ( No No No ! ).

badenwurtca

And now someone has asked the question in their thread as to " Why do we need a King ", Yes I Kid You Not ! The most important piece in your little army of chessmen and they want to get rid of him. Again the answer is NO NO NO !!!

badenwurtca

Mind you there is also a funny side to this discussion. Years ago back when I still had Cable-TV they used to show a late night ad for a fitness program and this ad was hosted by a young lady who would start off by yelling into the TV camera: " Let's Stop The Insanity !!! " Yup those are my feelings exactly  lol.

badenwurtca
Destroyer942 wrote:

Nah,there has to be a small imbalance so that it isn't as drawish.

   ---   Well there is indeed a bit of an imbalance in Chess because you have 2 players in the game and each person on this planet has a unique brain ( well then again some people are a bit on the slow side  lol ).

badenwurtca

So I see where someone is complaining about the En Passant rule. Well it a rule of the game so just get used to it and carry on  lol.

Nghtstalker
Caesar49bc wrote:

Go , Baduk in Korea, Weiqi in China, is far more of a perfect game. The rules are far more simple, and the games have exponentially more possible moves. Also, players put a stone on the board, and the stone never move: that in itself is simplicity at it's finest. Chess on the other hand, has constantly changing patterns. That's not to say there isn't beauty in Chess... far from it: Chess compositions isn't just about making a mating problems on a chess board, it has to have beauty in it's construction, and a theme to it's existence. The theme is usually the key to solving it, btw.

Go also has problem compositions also. Not that familiar with those, but there are some amazing examples of problems that can have a whole classroom of high level players scratching their heads. (Probably the chess equivalent to a classroom of USCF "A" level players).

I suppose the hardest GO problems are ones that mimic the "Hand of God" concept in GO: a move that is so rare, that it's said that the player had Hand of God in placing it.

Plus the game of GO has been around for at least 2500 years, but possibly as long as 4000 years ago. The testament of any game surviving that long, practically unchanged, and still played around the globe is amazing. Perhaps even more amazing is that there are professional players that make a living playing a game that might be 4000 years old.

I am a GO player though not very good.   And a worse Chess player.   I only recently started playing Chess   with a few online games after not playing since a kid.  I think they are both great games.  To say one is more perfect I do not think that is accurate.  They both have aspects that make them interesting.  And both defy the human ability to fully solve or memorize.  They were designed to challenge people not computers.  I prefer GO I love the simplicity of the rules and its hidden complexity, but after playing Chess again I admire the dynamic of a changing board.   

I definitely invite Chess players to learn GO.  I think it will help your mind and Chess game.  Because it is better?  No, because it will force you to learn something new, and see things differently.  And we are all richer if we learn more.

badenwurtca

Thanks for the posts.

badenwurtca
Wazir20 wrote:

#119 Changes are important to make something more exciting...

   ---   There have not been any major changes in the rules of Chess for several hundred years and needless to say none are required at this time  lol.

Drawgood
Chess is not perfect. Chess players should always look to discover something that may improve the game. Chess clock is also not the biggest change in last 500 years. You should read about history of chess.
KingKev52

The future is 3D chess - must be true saw it on a star trek episode.

bigdog4ife

future is new modes of chess

badenwurtca

Thanks for the posts.

badenwurtca
badenwurtca wrote:

So I see where someone is complaining about the En Passant rule. Well it a rule of the game so just get used to it and carry on  lol.

   ---   I see that there are now more threads complaining about En Passant. Sorry but it stays and there will not be any rule changes ( not now, not ever  lol ).