Notice at 1:08 he has to stop playing to accept an award for the chess tournament he just played in, then he goes right back to checkers heh
Why is Chess way better than checkers?

Yeah, both games are fine. I don't play checkers though...
I'm not smart enough to be good at more than 1 game anyway, and I chose chess a long time ago.

In 1756, a checkers book was published that contained many valuable positions and endgames in it. One of them, simply called "4th Position," was studied and used as kind of a way to draw the equivalent of the "Lucena Position" in chess, or win it if the other side were to move. In 2003, I proved there was a better way to win requiring fewer moves, as well as a better defense. Even the great checkers legend Marion Tinsley missed this, as did the rest of the checkers-playing world. I wrote a program to solve the endgames, so my database was omniscient. Having written chess and checkers programs, I promise you, checkers is harder to play in the endgame, and it is widely misunderstood and too often mistaken for "simple." It is not.
10^15 and solved vs. 10^46 and unsolvable. In that sense Checkers is actually closer to Tic Tac Toe (10^5) in complexity than it is to Chess.

Complexity is only relevant up to the point that humans can't master the game, and it's trivially easy to come up with a game high in complexity that's no fun to play.
For these two reasons complexity isn't a very useful standard.

Complexity is only relevant up to the point that humans can't master the game, and it's trivially easy to come up with a game high in complexity that's no fun to play.
For these two reasons complexity isn't a very useful standard.
Except that humans already mastered Checkers...which is why matches had to be modified to start from non-standard positions to make the outcome unknown again. When Chess is forced to use the 960 variant because all GM tournament games are draws, then maybe you can come back to this argument.

Complexity is only relevant up to the point that humans can't master the game, and it's trivially easy to come up with a game high in complexity that's no fun to play.
For these two reasons complexity isn't a very useful standard.
Except that humans already mastered Checkers...which is why matches had to be modified to start from non-standard positions to make the outcome unknown again. When Chess is forced to use the 960 variant because all GM tournament games are draws, then maybe you can come back to this argument.
Not exactly true. There are 2 types of tournaments (actually 3) GAYP or freestyle in which the opening is chosen by the participants such as in chess and also 3 move where the opening is ballotted and random. The third is less often played but occasionally. So standard position tournaments are played and we have a world champion GM Lubabalo Kondlo from South Africa in GAYP and GM Sergio Scarpetta from Italy in 3 move. Current world champion in 11 man ballot the other type is GM Alexander Moiseyev. All great checker players.
What I don’t understand is the need by chess players to say that checkers is simpler and less of a game. It is easily as challenging as chess and I play both. If you are saying this are you playing both? Do you play checker Grandmasters? When you have done this and know the intricacies of the game then you can voice a knowledgeable opinion.
Until then you don’t know anything.
Also don’t understand why chess players particularly pick on checkers and checker players. Why don’t they save some of their venom for Go players or Xiangqi or Shogi players. Or other games. Maybe they realise it is a challenging game and feel threatened by people who play both and appreciate both.
I was shocked when I looked at the forums here and saw the comments reserved especially for the game of checkers and kept quiet about the fact I play both. But after the club was started it is obvious that many people can play and enjoy both these games and all we ask is some politeness. If you don’t like checkers and can’t play it. Don’t. But don’t feel the need to put down the game and those who do play and enjoy it.

Bet the huge majority of GM checker game... are draws?
Lion has played yes, with an alcoholic uncle... who used to awe the girls hopping hid checks about... until Chess was brought on... and he couldn't move a piece?!
If Ivanchuk hadn't dabbled with checkers and Math and stuff... he would have been as good as Kasparov.
Anyway Gothic, kookaburra ect. if checkers is so much better than Chess... go play on checker site... and let us play the intellectual game.
Lion has spoken.

Well you can't play both... not if you want to get super good at either.
As said, Ivanchuk had too many intrests... he had similar talent of Kasparov... but not the drive and tunnel vision.
By the way, Chess players get abuse too?
Other day, a very fat young lady declared... she couldn't stand Chess, is soo boring?! While munching chocolate?!
Had the urge to either...
Slap her.
Give her a lecture on the beauty of giuco piano, sicilian, KID ect.
Smile and say... some find that.
Chose the latter.

I can play both. Most of us will never be super great at anything. And one day I may decide which I prefer. Not today.
Maybe you should slap yourself then for doing what she did. :-). As you should have known better.

One of my friends who won the Welsh Open and the Birmingham Cup actually has an abstract board games club and plays lots of games.
He plays chess and checkers at a very good level at both. And many games.
It can be done
Maybe you should. Sounds like you need exposure to more than one game so you can see that many games have merit.
Vassily is playing 8x8 Russian checkers in that video.