Refined Chess.

[Cubeman]

Just looked at ChessBase report on a new suggestion for chess scoring.If it takes off then chess programming would have to change slightly to accomodate the new rules.This would be good for bussiness with everyone having to buy new software.
I personally like the reward for winning slightly if you stalemate your opponent and in one on one game you will feel the same as a normal win.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5372

[Kempelen]

I found it a very interesting suggestion

[CRoberson]

Looks like a bad idea. It doesn't solve the drawing problem at all.

As I understand it, the drawing problem stems from too many draw
by agreements. With his suggestion, draw by agreement is still a
half point.

Here is my suggestion. Get rid of the motivation to draw by agreement.
All draw by agreements end in a score of 0 for both sides!

That will force them to play it out. Possible exceptions for endings
with forced draws.

[michiguel]

Looks like a bad idea. It doesn't solve the drawing problem at all.

As I understand it, the drawing problem stems from too many draw
by agreements. With his suggestion, draw by agreement is still a
half point.

Here is my suggestion. Get rid of the motivation to draw by agreement.
All draw by agreements end in a score of 0 for both sides!

That will force them to play it out. Possible exceptions for endings
with forced draws.

Soccer system maybe less drastic. 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss.

Miguel

[rjgibert]

His idea of scoring--compelling an opponent to repeat--as a slight win is terrible. Verifying whether a position has repeated or not can be a pain in the ass. Why give this pain in the ass greater prominence? I hate that. In some endings this would be a nightmare.

The remainder of his idea is old and is one I like. A simple improvement would be to score a win as 6 points, slight win as 4 points, a draw as 3 points, etc. People are turned off by fractions and it is stupid to have them when they are unnecessary.

Could you imagine playing basketball where a 3 pointer is scored as 1 point, a regular basket as 2/3 of a point and a free-throw as 1/3 of a point? An analogous example using American football would be even worse.

BTW, the scoring actually used in ordinary chess is dumb. Why 1/2 points for a draw? It should be a win is 2 points, draw is 1 point and loss is 0 points of course. Let's face it, we chess players are a bunch of retards. The so called "dumb jocks" have more intelligent scoring systems than we do. How embarrassing!

[PauloSoare]

Looks like a bad idea. It doesn't solve the drawing problem at all.

As I understand it, the drawing problem stems from too many draw
by agreements. With his suggestion, draw by agreement is still a
half point.

Here is my suggestion. Get rid of the motivation to draw by agreement.
All draw by agreements end in a score of 0 for both sides!

That will force them to play it out. Possible exceptions for endings
with forced draws.

I think it will be difficult to define what is a "forced draw". There is still the
problem of control time, someone could miss in time pressure.
May be better to adopt the solution given to the soccer,
as Miguel said.

[PauloSoare]

Looks like a bad idea. It doesn't solve the drawing problem at all.

As I understand it, the drawing problem stems from too many draw
by agreements. With his suggestion, draw by agreement is still a
half point.

Here is my suggestion. Get rid of the motivation to draw by agreement.
All draw by agreements end in a score of 0 for both sides!

That will force them to play it out. Possible exceptions for endings
with forced draws.

I think it will be difficult to define what is a "forced draw". There is still the
problem of control time, someone could miss in time pressure.
May be better to adopt the solution given to the soccer,
as Miguel said.

[hgm]

His idea of scoring--compelling an opponent to repeat--as a slight win is terrible. Verifying whether a position has repeated or not can be a pain in the ass. Why give this pain in the ass greater prominence? I hate that. In some endings this would be a nightmare.

Indeed! In Xiangqi repeats are not automatically draws, and there are 2 pages of rules to decide which side wins in case of a 3-fold repeat. It is an absolutely horrific mess.

Of course these rules have an extremely drastic effect on end-games. Nevertheles XQ remains an extremely drawish game.

[Cubeman]

Looks like a bad idea. It doesn't solve the drawing problem at all.

As I understand it, the drawing problem stems from too many draw
by agreements. With his suggestion, draw by agreement is still a
half point.

Here is my suggestion. Get rid of the motivation to draw by agreement.
All draw by agreements end in a score of 0 for both sides!

That will force them to play it out. Possible exceptions for endings
with forced draws.

In that case you will find both players will just play the game out to a boring draw any way.This new proposal will give more chances for players to get optimal points from the position.Also it would mean that spectators will stay glued to the screen to the end.
One downside is that lower rated players may be inclined to agree to a slight loss to a higher rated player when the position is still equal.