#1
"both you and your opponent know how to play it and it is always a draw"
++ Even at top GM level and ICCF correspondence it is not always a draw.
"whoever makes more best moves" ++ Rather: whoever makes no mistake
"there is always a perfect bot available to everyone"
++ There is no perfect bot. Take your bot to ICCF correspondence and they will beat it.
When I was around 1600, I felt much the same. Whatever opening was played, I tended to end up in sterile, drawish positions where neither side could undertake much.
So I deliberately started working on an opening repertoire whose top priority was to unbalance the game, right from the start. Against the e-Pawn opening, I played the Sicilian Najdorf. Against the d-Pawn, the King's Indian Defense. Against the English, I would play the Botvinnik System. As White, I played the Barcza, leading into a King's Indian Attack.
Granted, I lost my share of games... every player does... but the proportion of draws went way down and the excitement level skyrocketed.
The better I'm getting the more technical and "drawish" my games and plans become. I actually don't mind this though! It brings a whole new element of skills and strategies that the sharp, tactical, blunder filled games of 2 wild 1400 rated players wouldn't know the first thing about. Learning endgames and deeper strategy is like learning a completely new game. I'm sure in a few months the novelty will wear off and chess will become boring.
Yes, you can always get better at chess, but at some point it just becomes like those times when you play tic-tac-toe and both you and your opponent know how to play it and it is always a draw and because of that, it's pointless. Chess is like a very complex version of it. At some point it just becomes "whoever makes more best moves". Combined with the fact, that there is always a perfect bot available to everyone, which is literally impossible to beat, no matter what you do.
Maybe I just played too much chess and it became boring. Still though, I agree, that it is always fun to play chess with some random guy or friend and have some unexpected positions.
I don't know why I wrote this, I just wanted to share my opinion and feelings and I am curious if some people thought of the same thing before.
Nah, there are always surprises, which keeps it interesting.
But I guess it's true that, the better you get, the longer you have to wait for things to get crazy / interesting.
For a beginner things are interesting on move 1. For me maybe not until move 10 or 15, for a 2700 GM maybe only 1 out of 3-4 games reaches an interesting position, IDK.
Yes, you can always get better at chess, but at some point it just becomes like those times when you play tic-tac-toe and both you and your opponent know how to play it and it is always a draw and because of that, it's pointless. Chess is like a very complex version of it. At some point it just becomes "whoever makes more best moves". Combined with the fact, that there is always a perfect bot available to everyone, which is literally impossible to beat, no matter what you do.
Maybe I just played too much chess and it became boring. Still though, I agree, that it is always fun to play chess with some random guy or friend and have some unexpected positions.
I don't know why I wrote this, I just wanted to share my opinion and feelings and I am curious if some people thought of the same thing before.