Ideas for Chess Rule Changes to Reduce Draws?

Since the 2016 World Championship had 10 out of 12 games end in a draw. I think it might be time to make some rule changes so that draws are not so frequent.

Ideally, the rule changes wouldn't be major changes and chess would stay very close to the way it is currently played.

Does anyone have any good ideas?    

most ideas ive heard at the top level have been increasing brilliancy prizes so that people dont play boring. and making it so that a draw isnt worth half of a win. it should be worth a third of a win so that people play more aggressively. people who dont know anything about football or basketball enjoy watching the game. all a layperson sees is a ton of draws in chess.

Make any move that would repeat the position an illegal move. Remove the 50 move rule. Make stalemate the same as checkmate. Remove players ability to agree to a draw.

That should do it. Now even king vs king will not end in a draw since not being able to repeat the position means it will eventually result in stalemate and then it will be a decisive result.

lutak22

Please come out of the closet somewhere else. You should start your own forum with a headline like this

"I'm lutak22 and I'm GAY"

Capablanca obviously cared about draws.

I thought this was a bad troll thread or made by a weak player (<1300), but I notice that 2 players from "Over the board" commented on your homepage which means that you are likely not trolling and likely aren't a weak player.

You are serious right?

Chess is a draw with best play. It makes sense that some of the world's strongest players could play it safe to try and draw.

The Kasparov vs Karpov matches had many draws, but there was much fighting chess there. Draws at the highest level do not always equate to draws at the lower level. I've only had 3 USCF rated draws and I've played at least 100 USCF rated games.

Maeiv 

The idea of only giving 1/3 of a point for draws is a very interesting idea. Where did you read or hear about that?

This is the public forums and don't want to be sucked into illogical debate (not that the OP's question was illogical, but there can be many trolls who comment on the forums, so I might bump into at least one of them).

Untracking...

This discussion has basically moved to:

Capablanca's Fear of "Death Draw" is Here

People have posted some interesting ideas there. 

One of them is called "Free Castling", which used to be rule.

1.  Someone who offers a draw automatically forfeits the game.

2.  No 50 move rule or threefold repetition anymore, it keeps going until someone loses consciousness.

3.  A stalemate is a win for whoever does the stalemating. 

I don't think chess is a drawish game. The fact that there are many draws is a symptom of the fact that chess is an extremely fair game which rewards the skill of the players on an extremely even ratio and doesn't leave things to chance. There are no draws in football (and few draws in the other kind of football) because it's not as well designed of a game and there is a lot left to chance, even when a team is completely outmatched skill wise. Taking away the drawishness of chess would ultimately mean making the game less balanced, which is what we love about it. The fact that the top players play the best possible chess they can and get lots of draws is the same reason a 1200 players has a 0% chance to win against a 2000+ player. Most sports are not like that, the skill gap is very small. The huge skill gap in chess where my friends could literally never beat me and I could literally never beat a grandmaster is one of my favorite things about chess. A bad football team (either kind) has a chance of beating a much better football team. But in chess, you can get people with a skill gap in the hundreds or thousands (the number of games they need to play to win a game on average) which is absolutely beautiful. 

I think such rules only punish the players for playing well. You just end up with something akin to the blunderfest that was the St. Louis rapid and blitz... Chess is hard at that level. Taking risks is practically a losing decision. Carlsen took a risk against Karjakin and almost lost the title. And that was because of one game only... Just imagine if players are forced to shoot themselves in the foot...

Draws are beautiful, is .33x win for black side.

Rule:

Draw affords White 0.25 - 0.75 Black

or

Draw affords White 0.00 - 0.25 Black

No draw offers before move 40. That would get rid of the 30% of them.

Then in swiss or round robin formats, the 3-1-0 scoring system would help a lot. (3 points for a win, one for a draw, 0 for a loss)

Here is one tournament they used that system in. the winner Wang Hao got 6 wins, 3 losses, and only one draw, after 10 rounds!

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=78291

I also saw one other diea proposed. I think it was by Mihai Suba. Was idea for a chess beauty contest.

Idea was you play the tournament like noramal. then a panel of judges reviews the games, and awards 10 points, to be split between the 2 players, for each game.

So say two players play, white wins. The judges may award 3 points to white, and 7 to black, IF they felt black played more beautifully.