Author: walter irvin
Date: 06:32:04 08/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 1999 at 16:56:10, Pete Galati wrote: >[..... >>>>Uri, chess could have more followers if whole games finished in checkmate or in >>>>a very simple draw, but that is not our reality. >>>>In the final position of the game Rodhe x Rebel, I don't see chances for none >>>>of the sides. >>>> >>>>Paulo Soares >>> >>>Then maybe it's a good thing they don't all end in a checkmate, while I feel >>>that more parents should be teaching Chess to their children, I would certainly >>>question the need for more Chess followers. >>> >>>Pete >> >>Pete, I didn't understand your point. >>All the sports that I know finish with a very defined result. If chess >>finished with a better defined result, certainly more people would be >>interested in the game. That means that there would be more money for chess >>and, consequently, for chesscomputer, resulting in better programs. >>Logically the people would also benefit of the good things that the chess >>offers. >>Paulo Soares > >No point in paticular. But in order to do away with draws you would have to >change the game and then it would no longer be Chess, it would be a variant. To >be honest I've always felt that in a draw the both sides of the board have lost >because neither side was able to win. > >As for money, I don't think Chess needs more money, nobody wants to see Chess >become baseball. > >Pete all you would have to do is for a draw give black 1/2 white nothing , as white should win anyway .
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.