Try or die. GM+ level Chess tournaments should only be held where capital punishment is legal.
What if Chess implemented a "try rule"?
Not sure what capital punishment has to do with anything...
Hello,
I agree that the "try rule" should definitely be tried in chess, to prevent stuff like https://en.chessbase.com/post/opinion-12-draws-not-really-exciting. Both the original version (moving white's king to e8 legally also wins) and your throne version (moving white's king to d8 or e8 legally) are interesting. Somewhat similar is the King of the Hill (https://lichess.org/variant/kingOfTheHill) rule (moving white's king to d4, e4, d5 or e5 legally), though I would also like to experiment with a restricted version of it (moving white's king to d5 or e5 legally).
Other possibilities would be to import "stalemating the opponent's king also wins" and/or "giving perpetual check loses" from Shogi.
Shameless plug: https://github.com/agt-the-walker/chess-utils#on-chess-variants
what's wrong with draws? They make the game more interesting.
I think we should have a try rule for dating. If I can advance my piece into her territory, I win.
Some schools already have a try rule. It's called a participation trophy. Even though you dont win you are a winner because you showed up. It's where winning and trying are really the same thing.
As for actual real chess games, I think if you try real hard and still cant win, a draw is a very good result. A draw at the professional level is probably very difficult to do. Losing at that level, just like my level, is extremely easy to do.
One of the problems that's been brought up with chess these days is the pervasiveness of draws on the professional level. A possible suggestion to this is the "Try Rule" (named after rugby, I believe) -- my take on it for chess would be that an alternative victory condition is advancing your king into either the enemy king or queen starting squares (which I'll dub the "throne"). The reason I pick both instead of just the king is that so both bishops would have a role in the endgame. This could substantially cut down on the amount of draws, although it would completely change the dynamic of the endgame.
The concept isn't a new one. Apparently, it's been discussed in the professional levels in shogi (Japanese chess) as a way of preventing impasse; the rule proposed there is having your king reach the opponent's king's square. This is interesting considering that shogi is inherently with very few draws. A computer game called Chess 2.0: The Sequel has a rule where getting a king into the opposite half of the board is a win. I think that approach is a little too much.
Any thoughts?