Classical Chess has a draw problem, but the solution isn't Armageddon.

Norway chess was a bit of hogwash with its Armageddon. I was frankly delighted with it when I read about it, but then the way it played out was not exactly fun.

I have not been a fan of other formats having anything to do with the outcome of a classical match. I haven't been a fan of Rapid chess deciding who becomes Classical World Champion and I didn't like a short format deciding who wins a classical tie (gets 1.5 points).

But let's be honest, draws are a problem in classical chess. I know people say but 'entertaining draws' are fine. Up to a point sure. However, even if most chess games finish in 'entertaining draws' its still nothing to be excited about.

Sports/game is a results business, and if no one ever wins, it fails to enthrall the casual chess viewer like me.

Would anyone watch the NBA or EPL if all games finished in draws. After a while people will say tear it up start new.

There is nothing wrong with changing to fit what the viewers want, all sports have done it, except Football because it does work very well the way it is.

Barring football though every sport has evolved and almost radically so. NBA got in the 3 point line, Tennis has reduced the no. of set in non grand slam matches for men, there is a clock on the serve, the NFL brought in 2 point conversion, the designated hitter in baseball, and cricket has brought in more viewer friendly versions of the sport.

I don't see why chess needs to be so rigid. Do we want chess to become tetris or something. There is a tetris world championship, but no one is watching.

Chess needs to find a way around the too many draw issues.