What do you do without clocks if a player refuse to move and think so the game is never finished?Ovyron wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:18 amI'll not dispute that, I've been saying for years that Crazyhouse is a superior game to chess, and that people should consider dropping chess and moving into a more fun variant, instead of trying to fix chess drawing rules to artificially decrease draws, research what most people would be willing to play (though, it turns out if you put some big prize money, people would play anything), so if it turned out playing from a chess puzzle would be best, I'd support that. But I'd be against still calling it chess, which is easy to define whenever you invite someone to play chess and they're shocked when something is different from what they expect.
You can click on the image to see what is happening, but basically people are being able to draw arrows and circles on the chessboard as they play games. Whenever it happens, to me it's no longer chess, because on a game in person you'll not see people getting out their crayons to draw on the board to help them visualize.
FIDE did lose me when they legalized illegal moves, as in, if your opponent makes an illegal move and you don't notice and the game continues to completion then the result of the game stands, or something like that, which makes chess a joke, because I could potentially take advantage of illegal blunders, by pretending I didn't notice them, and win the game, and it'd stand, or whatever.
What I'm saying is that the word "chess" describes a game, and this game has some properties, and a game with different properties is no longer chess, no matter how similar, or if it feels the same (like the variant with different pawn promotions.)
Chess would have these properties:
-It is a game played on a 8x8 board (Things like Capablanca Chess would be eliminated)
-It is played with 6 pieces, called pawn, bishop, knight, rook, queen and king, respectively (anything with a fairy piece would be eliminated)
-The pieces move like this <insert moving rules> (Most positions from 960 Chess are eliminated because kings move differently when castling)
-There's two sides, white and black, that control the pieces, and want to checkmate the opposing king (Things like Losing chess and Suicide chess are eliminated here, as long as any chess variant that is -identical to chess but with different objectives for winning, like promoting a pawn wins the game)
-Players can't make illegal moves that violate <moving rules>, but otherwise, they can choose any legal move and play it on the board (this eliminates thematic chess, players arranging to play certain moves if they face each other, and anything that starts the game forcing the player to have made some moves before the game started)
-Players start the game with 32 pieces on the board <insert here what pieces are on the opening position and their arrangement>, white plays first (for the purposes of this part, the colors of the pieces don't matter, but they're still defined as white and black so they can be differentiated on the chessboard, and players know when is their turn) and then black plays next, and they continue alternating moves (this eliminates material handicap games, games with extra pieces, and most shuffle chess positions that don't have pieces in their starting squares, variants where white or black move more than once, or can skip a turn, and, I guess, games where multiple people control any of the sides, so getting assistance would be cheating.)
-<Insert here rules about checking the king, and how it has to escape, capture the attacker or block the attack, and how being unable to do that is checkmate>
-A player checkmating the opposing king is awarded 1 point, and the other 0.
-<Insert here rules about draws, defining stalemate, draws for insufficient material, repetition of positions, and draws for going too long without a pawn move or capture happening>
-A player can resign at any point, doing so is the same as getting checkmated by the opponent.
-Players can offer a draw to their opponent, if it's rejected nothing happens, if it's accepted then doing so is the same as a stalemate (for simplicity purpose)
Unless I forgot something important that would work as a definition of chess, even if you wouldn't grant me the right to define it, chess as a word could be defined similarly to this.
Note that chess clocks are absent from this, because all they do is giving an incentive for players to move, lest, nothing stops white to never make a move, because the rules only say it has to eventually make it, they can take years to make it if they wanted.
At least in my country, chess clocks are too pricey, so the norm has been to play most chess tournaments without chess clocks. The surprising thing is that without clocks, people tend to play quick and the games end in a timely fashion. Not only games are finishing faster than if there was a 2 hour clock on there, people seem to be playing faster than in 10 0 games with clocks, and the games resemble chess more than the 10 0 games that end in a time struggle where players are moving their pieces and hitting their clocks like maniacs...
Even if my attempt at defining chess were garbage, I think another similar list could be built by someone else and everyone could agree with them that that's chess (the definition exists and there's a combination of characters that depicts it). I'd actually be interested in arguments by someone to claim something in the list isn't chess.
Do you have some arbiter to force a player to move in this case or to adjudicate the game?
Note that I know about a case when a player simply refused to move instead of resigning in a tournament with clocks.
In this case of course the player lose on time but when there is no clock losing on time is not possible.