Reply to David Bergan on Removal of The Draw

Sort:
Avatar of masteroftheknight

As you might now recently (26 days before I wrote this) a chess.com user called dbergan posted his thoughts on the fide rules of drawing a chess game in the following link:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-is-every-non-checkmate-a-0-5-0-5-draw

If you have not already seen it his proposal for a new point system was this:

Current FIDE Dbergan's Proposal
White Black White Black
White checkmates Black / Black resigns / Black loses on time 1 0 1 0
White stalemates Black 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.2
Draw*: White has more material** 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4
Draw*: Equal material** 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.6
Draw*: Black has more material** 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.7
Black stalemates White 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.8
Black checkmates White / White resigns / White loses on time 0 1 0 1

The reason I am writing about this in a seperate forum topic is because I want to express my opinion individually

So what are my thoughts

Looking at recent grandmaster games in a classical time format and the amount of draws in higher level like Daniel stated in his essay we could be reaching a sort of end of chess. This is talking specifically about classical chess. A very popular example of grandmasters constantly drawing chess games in a classical time format is the Carlsen vs Caruana world championship recently finished. All 12 games were drawn in a classical format but they should not have been. Even without too much analysis or being a good chess player you can see that Carlsen should have won match 12. Instead Carlsen offered draw because he knew Caruana would accept and he had an easy win in the shorter timed tiebreak.

Based on this information, I am not saying I agree with Daniel but I think he could be onto something. There are many things in his proposal I don't find justified but somethings are actually usable. For example I like the idea of no direct draw agreement and instead players can agree to a draw via a Fast 50. To add on to his idea I would say after 20 moves without a pawn, both players can propose a draw and the other player can choose to accept or decline. This ability can be possible between move 20 and 50 without any pawn moves, if checkmate or stalemate has not already occurred between this time. At move 50 after no pawn moves it is automatically a draw.

Something for example I completely don't think is justifiable is his proposal that if a player puts you in stalemate, it should be 0.8-0.2. I think for sure this should stay as it is because stalemate being a draw is a huge part of so many chess puzzles and endgame theory.

I think that this is my improved proposal compared to mine and fide's.

Current FIDE My Proposal
White Black White Black
White checkmates Black / Black resigns / Black loses on time 1 0 1 0
Draw: Agreement 0.5 0.5 N/A N/A
Draw: White stalemates Black 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Draw*: White has more material** 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Draw*: Equal material** 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Draw*: Black has more material** 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Draw: Black stalemates White 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Draw: Fast 50 rule N/A N/A 0.5 0.5
Draw: Insufficient Material but opponent runs out of time 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Black checkmates White / White resigns / White loses on time 0 1 0 1

So all I think should be changed is the removal of the ability to ask for draw any time you wnat and replace it with the Fast 50 rule I mentioned above.

Do you agree?

Avatar of masteroftheknight

UPDATE: 

Also I find David's idea of when in a KB vs K or KN vs K endgame that the KB or the KN should win extremely strange (BTW KB means King and Bishop and KN means King and Knight). This is because I myself have been many situations There is Knight or a Bishop and King vs and Knight or a Bishop, Kind and a pawn, where the pawnsless side's piece can take the pawn as a sacrifice. This an example of a simple engame theory idea resulting a draw that based on David's proposal will completely change.

An example of this:

 

Avatar of masteroftheknight

So what are your thoughts?