Hi guys,
I started a long discussion on
chess.com, here is the link:
www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-organizers/an-open-letter-to-fideI invite you to comment on it here please, if you find it interesting. I only hope I didn't break some rule by placing a link to another chess site here, but the content of thread is too long now to copy everything here, and I would like to solicit opinions from people here too.
"IM pfren #33 21 days ago
In my humble opinion, you should leave alone things you're not familiar with. Chess is certainly the first on the list."
lol
Jenium #13, 25 days ago:
"Excellent idea. I am sure all those organizers of small weekend tournaments with 2 games a day and a very narrow schedule will be delighted to have 20 players a round queuing up to get the chance to continue their games for an additional hour on the only notebook available...
Why all the draw hostility among amateurs? If you don't like Super-GM draws why not watch chess at a slightly lower level (2200-2600), eg. women's championships, smaller tournaments, national championships etc. where most games will have a decisive result?"
I wouldn't have anything to add to this.
A solution looking for a problem.
The original post is already tl;dr, so when halfway through it goes "okay that wasn't the best idea, but let me refine it", that really adds insult to injury. Please give us the final version straight ahead, especially if you're reposting it.
Also, +1 to #3. I'd add that chess is a very drawy game, (particularly at the top level), and you can also learn to enjoy the game of go, in which there are no draws whatsoever, and both players are forced to become more aggressive every time the points balance starts to tip the other way. (Also there are almost no engine-cheaters yet.)
There is no need to read justification details when idea is pretty irrational. Draws and draw conditions are fundamental as way of moving a piece. Most of entertaining and educative games in history of game played in this condition.
If you claim you did your research, you probably would know engines are not ultimate decision makers, specially if its about top level. During World Chess Championship match, players said that they couldn't understand some engine suggestions at certain positions. Because they are human and they are who are playing game not engines. Also chess engines have estimated ratings and they act as they programmed and designed. So they are not chess gods.
"Noone in the world so far did come up with anything similar to a solution that I proposed, so my idea is original at the global scope and very revolutionary and radical one"
Also this childish narcissism cringes me even more than idea itself. Even a big chess personality like Seirawan is clearly notifies that his criticism on WCC format won't affect anything.
Draws a part of chess...
