Two so-called “problems” that some people have with chess: (1) Too many draws. (2) A confusing stalemate rule.
Note: I didn’t say that these are problems for me. I’m happy with chess the way it is. Nevertheless, some people aren’t and it occurred to me this morning that there is a way of addressing both issues. The solution is to score a win as 3 points, a draw as 1 point, and placing your opponent in stalemate as 2 points. (The person getting stalemated would get 1 point.)
First, note that something similar has already been tried: the 3-1-0 scoring system with 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw. Compared with the 3-1-0 system, my system does not change anything for the person getting stalemated. He still gets 1 point. But it rewards the player with the stronger position, by giving him 2 points instead of 1.
I have two main arguments in favor of this. One is fairness. When I teach kids, it’s hard to justify to them why they only get a draw when in the ordinary course of events, the opponent would have to move his king into check and thereby lose. Usually the side that forces a stalemate has a pronounced advantage over the other side.
That argument really applies to beginners only; experienced players understand how to force checkmate. However, the second argument applies to experienced players. There are quite a few drawn endgames that are only drawn because of stalemate. Examples include king and pawn versus king when the stronger king can’t get in front of the pawn; K+B+RP versus K with the “wrong” rook pawn; and K+Q vs. K+RP or BP with the pawn on the seventh rank. In all these cases, the stronger player would get 2 points instead of 1.
This rule would give players incentive to play out endings where they have a slight but not winning advantage. To me, the workhorse here is the K+P vs. K ending. I suspect that there are lots of endings that would be drawn today that could be turned into “2-point draws,” and one might have to re-learn some areas of endgame theory in order to take advantage of those opportunities. The change could even have an effect on the middlegame, giving players more of an incentive to keep going in positions with a slight advantage. Even opening theory might change, if White could find a way to reliably get 2-point draws from, say, the Berlin Variation of the Ruy Lopez.
As I said, I’m not particularly worried about the draw issue myself, and generally speaking I loathe chess variations or “fantasy chess.” But for those who like to experiment, what do you think about this idea? Is there some obvious flaw?
