13223 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Another change I'd propose is to change the scoring system so that W=3 D=1 L=0. This wouldn't stop the scenario where two players tied for the lead in the last round agree to a quick draw, but it would reduce the number of draws dramatically.
How about Win=3, Draw-as-black=2, Draw-as-White=1, Loss=0, this way every game results in 3 points.
Your point system implies there is no other way white must win. And it gives black huge advantage. I disagree.
footbal scoring system is not effective as an anti-draw system. London classic or Bilbao grand slam have the same draw rate as Tata Steel or the Tal Memorial.
In case of a draw:
1. Play Armageddon and sudden death.
2. Best of 3.
I like the idea, even though I don't even know what sudden death or armageddon is.
Armageddon is Black gets the draw odd, and white gets the time odd. Sudden death is whoever wins the 1st game of a series gets the win.
I read about that armageddon being used for the US championship. It is a disgrace to chess to decide a champion based on a blitz game. It makes the whole thing illigitimate, its something Saddam Hussein thought up to ruin American chess.
Read the rules for the World Championship.
Look, it's an agreed draw. Meaning that neither party is better than the other. It's not a disgrace, it's just a way to break deadlock.
Many soccer championship were decided by penalties even in the elimination stage. That brought some disappointment to disgrace soccer = penalties. But none has come up with a better idea to break deadlock. I remember suddent death was tried with disappointment and never played again. It's back to 2x 45' + OT 2x15' + penalties to break deadlock.
The reason is they still play soccer for 2x45' + 2x15'. The penalties feature is meant to break deadlock.
Back to chess. They still play chess and deadlock occurs. It's still chess in full meaning. The armageddon is meant only to break deadlock.
It's more disappointment that no champion is resulted from playing chess.
W=1 L=0 D=0 First person to 7 wins. That way no ties. Basic rules of chess apply. Period. Agreed upon time limit of 2 hrs per player or if both agree longer... No extra rules, or conditions.
If in doubt, go with south park rules and settle it by Rochambeau.
Or rock, paper, scissors, lizard, spock :)
Fried Liver adventure!
by isaacnewt 6 minutes ago
Is the Benko Gambit Sound?
by isaacnewt 12 minutes ago
game will not expire
by Martin_Stahl 14 minutes ago
8/26/2016 - Kouatly - Tsheshkovsky, Hoogovens 1988
by Kotteb 17 minutes ago
Is my opponent a fake account?
by RedGirlZ 19 minutes ago
by Martin_Stahl 19 minutes ago
What is this opening?
by Rob3rtJamesFischer 25 minutes ago
Does most of the world really love the stalemate factor?
by Strangemover 35 minutes ago
by ryanjiang 39 minutes ago
8/24/2016 - Shock And Awe
by DanielsBeterThnHeath 39 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!