Check out Kyoto Shogi, our featured variant for June, 2025.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Something to ponder: should chess variants that never can have a game end in a draw actually displease purists?[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Daniel Zacharias wrote on Sat, Jun 7 11:22 PM UTC in reply to Kevin Pacey from 06:58 AM:

I'm glad I'm not so good at chess that I think trying to win is risky. If that's how high level chess players think, then chess with the current rules is a poor vehicle for high level competition.

Imagine you were designing chess for the first time. Would you really think it a good idea to design the rules such that it would make sense for the second player to go into a game with the goal of trying to draw? I don't know the statistics on this, but it sounds like size of the first move advantage also contributes to that problem.

Back to your original question; when I submitted Expanded Chess here at first, I included drawless end game rules, but changed that part because it was suggested to be too different. I don't really disagree with that perspective myself. Draws have historically been part of chess. Perhaps what makes drawless rules feel off is that it's hard (if not impossible) to remove draws without introducing a new victory condition or changing the pieces. And those are what really make chess feel like chess to normal players who rarely ever see a draw.