Smyslov_Fan wrote on 05/23/12 at 21:37:02:

I fully agree. This is both archaic and timeless. Unfortunately, it also contributes to the large draw range of chess. Maybe mankind needs some fresh ideas from "outside" to reach a new level of chess. As I don't think that those little green men are very interested in chess, maybe computers will be of some help, when they've become even stronger and start to understand strategy ...

There seem to be quite a lot of "Kx"-rules in circulation. Now I have a fantastic ( ) idea how everybody could benefit from that!

My proposed rule is the following: Make the row the king has to reach dependent of the "firepower" remaining on the board. If we count as follows: Q = 9, R = 4.5, B/N = 3, P = 1, the total at the beginning of the game is 38 for each side or 76 for both. As long as the remaining total firepower is higher than, say, 60, we have a K5R (the king must reach the 5^th rank in order to win). Between 40 and 60, there's a K6R, between 20 and 40 a K7R, and below 20 a K8R.

Now comes the trick: It would be quite confusing if the players always had to calculate the remaining pieces on the board. So I suggest an additional tool for playing chess (in addition to board, pieces and clock): A balance. All captured pieces have to be put on this balance, and a scale indicates if the game is still under K6R or has entered K7R. Therefore, the weight of the pieces becomes important. It must be proportional to their value. So if a pawn weighs 5 gramms, a queen must have a weight of 9 x 5 gramms = 45 gramms.

So far this idea contributes to the welfare of manufacturers of balances and of chess piece manufacturers. But my brainwave also allows a totally new way of cheating in chess: You can secretly bring your own pieces with a weight differing from the weight of the "official" pieces. Now it suddenly makes sense to play with counterfeit pieces! 

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang

And please, don't take this post serious!

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/21/12 at 21:49:58:

Who is the addressee of this question? Interpreting the header of the thread, probably created by Smyslov_Fan, the term "draw death" seems to suggest that we're discussing "serious" chess variations, but as it's not "my" thread, I can hardly stipulate its topics.

-----------------

Coming back to Yedidias suggestion (cf. post #19, brought up by dfan), it again seems to be a "give-and-take"-situation. Take a variation like the bishop sacrifice in the Slav (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 e6 7.f3 Bb4 8.e4 Bxe4 9.fxe4 Nxe4). I consider this an interesting fighting variation, and it would be a pity if it wouldn't be playable any more. But that seems to be the case, if Yedidia's proposal would become reality, as White has (instead of the "fighting" 10.Bd2) also the meek 10.Qf3. It would follow 10...Qxd4 11.Qxf7 Kd8 12.Bg5 Nxg5 13.Qxg7 Bxc3 14.bxc3 Qxc3 15.Ke2 Qc2 16.Ke1 Qc3 with a perpetual. So far, so good, no reason for Black to abandon this variation if he isn't in a must-win-situation. But the last capture was done by Black (in the 14^th move, printed bold), so he would "lose the draw". That means that the whole bishop sacrifice variation would become obsolete. (Actually, Black has the deviation 12...Kc8 13.Qxe6 Kc7 14.Qf7 Kc8, and now the only move played is 15.Qe6 with a perpetual; here it is White who has made the last capture. But I think White can "improve" with 15.Qf5N! Nd7 16.Nxd7 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Qxc3 18.Ke2 Qd3, again a perpetual, but with the last capture by Black.)

On the other side, variations which are (from a theoretical point of view) not playable for White, as Black has a draw in hand, might become acceptable, if Black's draw is only achievable by him "doing the last capture". I have no example at hand at the moment, but I'm sure there are many such variations out there.

Correct, it does sort of prevent endgames. King to the 5th is much more tactical of a game. I do apologize for posting as I thought this thread was about chess variants, not how to deal with lots of draws.

As far as draws are concerned. Just make draws worth zero points, losses worth and zero points and wins worth 1 point. Players won't want to draw as far as the tournament standings are concerned and but if they do the game will not adversely affect their rating. Draws, losses and wins will still be rated the same way, that way players won't be forced to lose rating points by playing on in completely drawn positions they normally wouldn't play on in.  Overall, this should inspire more interesting chess, especially at the top level.

I created a new variant that is extremely tactical. Its the same as chess but with the addition of one more rule, if either sides king gets to their respective, 5th rank then they win. Just to clarify, if white's king marches to any square on rank 5 he wins and if black marches his king to any square on rank 4 he wins. Seems sort of silly at first, but this sort of chess makes the game highly tactical b/c you have to watch out for possible combinations involving a king march. Also, we discovered that it is truly doubled edge to launch an attack that might have the other guys king running to the middle of the board as he might make it to the 5th and win before you can checkmate him. 

Also, you can't just run your king to the 5th at the start of the game b/c you get checkmated. The nice point is it makes the game more exciting b/c any endgame that is reached is balance between trying to queen a pawn and get your king to the 5th. 

Anyway, thought i would share the zany creation known as "king to the 5th".

Zwischenzugzwang wrote on 05/21/12 at 13:51:02:

If you take the pawn to go into a R+B vs R endgame, you should be able to force him to make the last capture.

Edited:

I think you are confusing the draw rate of games with the draw margin within a game. While I do think there is a correlation, it is definately not 1:1. Ie many gambits can be played as often the endgame a pawn down can be held.