No. It seems fine.
Do you think that chess needs to change?
Sort:
chess is perfect.
I feel chess is too drawish in general. The chess of other nations often minimize this problem (and yes, it is a problem in my opinion) by treating stalemate differently than in western chess. But this game is dominated by folks with an intellectual, if not financial, investment in the status quo. These are the same folks who would no doubt have objected to the modern queen, castling, two-square initial pawn move, en passent, and chess clocks, had they been around at the dawn of those proposed changes to the game.
zslane wrote:
I feel chess is too drawish in general. The chess of other nations often minimize this problem (and yes, it is a problem in my opinion) by treating stalemate differently than in western chess. But this game is dominated by folks with an intellectual, if not financial, investment in the status quo. These are the same folks who would no doubt have objected to the modern queen, castling, two-square initial pawn move, en passent, and chess clocks, had they been around at the dawn of those proposed changes to the game.
Chess is very balanced. Those added things were added to make the game faster without affecting the balance. The problem with eliminating or severely reducing draws is that it is hard to simultaneously destroy the balance as well keep it intact. What change can be made that removes draws but keeps the two armies in balance?
Once someone finds an answer to that question maybe something can be done but until then there will be draws.
It is a strange notion of balance when the only way to make the game "fair" is to allow each player a chance to play white. White almost always plays to win while black almost always plays to draw. That is not balance. In order for white and black to have equal chances, something needs to be done to compensate black for white's one ply tempo advantage. That is the first step. The second is to then eliminate stalemate as a "tool" by which black seeks to avoid losing. A game in which one side is almost always simply trying to avoid losing, rather than trying to win, is flawed and not really balanced at all.
If you do, how do you think so. Should we make new rules or change the board setup, or do something else?