Make Horde Chess more balanced

So far, Cynosure vs Goldilocks, pieces win 3 times, pawns win 0, if you count this game as a piece win instead of blunder. 45.Rxb2 would have won. http://en.lichess.org/y8EPeVhw

I didn't even see 45.Rxb2! How frustrating.

It went - at my level - as 3 - 3.

Goldilocks was a very strong opponent, and extremely adept at defending as black. I think our games will require closer analysis by better players (ie, Chess Whiz), but I think in the latter games when he'd got used to me 1.c3 2.d3. 3.b3 opening, his defending was exceptional.

Goldilocks is conventionally on average about 200 rating points higher than me. However, whilst in a normal game that would be a significant advantage, I think the challenging nature of horde removed that somewhat. In terms of endurance, however, I definitely began feeling fatigue around game 4.

Despite this, I think the last two games we played, Goldilocks really got into the swing of it and had really got into the zone. My play was stifled and blocked in by his clever use of pawns.

While the end result, then, was 3 - 3, if it were perfect play - probably the same result (in draws), but let's see what Whiz spots (currently at 4 - 2).

My thanks to Golidlocks for being a great, courteous opponent in this experiment and a good sport.

What about the idea of allowing black's pawns on the 8th rank to make a double jump similar to how pawn's on the 7th rank can?

Game 4, white can win: 34.Kxe3 instead of 34.Nxf3. lichess.org/mNeqlYmQ#64

Game 5, I don't like 31.Rxa5. White might be able to hold without this move, but it's unclear. lichess.org/N1267JXs#60

Game 6 is definitely unclear to me. Good series! lichess.org/VTPkkLJO

This leaves a match score of perhaps 4-2 in favor of the pieces. Considering Goldilocks is the current ChessWhiz Cup champion, obviously he should have won the series, so my conclusion is that black should be strengthened. :-)

I would be interested in a start position that moves the e8 and d8 pawns up to e4 and d4. The more advanced pawns give black a boost, and slightly shortens the game by cutting out some of black's tedious pawn moves.

Thoughts?

I didn't realise Goldilocks was the champion.

It definitely needs to be strengthened in that case, especially if I made blunders in game 4.

Um - the series was 4-2 pawns (assuming the one loss on time was actually a win). Of course mistakes on both sides.
http://en.lichess.org/y8EPeVhw Rxb2 - why not simply a4? The queen is somewhat tied down to the 3 connected pawns or if it gets adventurous, c2 is also arriving - or a3 also on its way. How does white make progress?

But - anyway - ChessWhiz picks blunders by white - but I can also make improvements in all games! Both cynosure and I were still learning how to play against different ideas... that is the point: why change anything until we are certain its not just our lack of knowledge but an inherent flaw? As cynosure kindly says, I finally was starting to work out how he approached this... before that was getting a bit smashed :)

I still remain unconvinced it is as clear as Whiz says it is.

If you are interested in seeing how balanced the game It is
check only games of classical control, with 4+0 anyone can win
even if It is unbalanced.
But this also explains that even if horde is a "bad" game, unbalanced, It can be played on bullet and still might be enjoyable
I however think that if the game is not balanced It does not make sense to play it.

I think another test - instead of classical - is maybe just 5+3 - or something with an increment. I agree, time-trouble blunders should have no bearing on assessing this variant.

Just played 3 with Chess Suxx - white won each time.

Just finished another series with a strong opp - again, white seemed to be winning it - but after learning his style, black picked up wins once more...