1.Add a “Stalemate = Victory” chess variant

I’ve for years wondered about the Stalemate rule. Here’s why:

1) Chess is a competitive game, Victory being the main Objective besides fun etc.

2) Rules of Chess contain the “Forced to Move on every Turn” rule.

3) Stalemate breaks the “FtMoeT” rule. Why not Zugzwang instead!?

4) There are too many draws in Master level chess, whose purpose is to determine a winner!

5) Checkmate ends the game Before a King is captured. This encourages beginners to add visualization to the board more, and saves time from more experienceds. Yet we all know, the King WOULD get captured if the game continued. The checkmate rule, of ending game before capture, may have confused players to conclude stalemate. Eg the King is never captured, so stalemate.

6) Rules of Chess contain the “Impossibility to 1 turn suicide with King”. This is to help beginners play longer games. It may be another reason for confusing players to add the Stalemate rule. King suicide could well be added to games, however; if you touch+moved your King to suicide or ignored a king attack, why not lose the game instantly after that king’s capture?

7) The choice seems now between these 2 combos of claims:

7.1) (Ban on King suicide + Ban on King murder = Ban on Losing + Ban on Winning) <=vs=> (Approval on Errors + Approval on Zugzwang = Approval on Losing + Approval on Winning)

8) Because of claim #1, “Victory or Defeat = Fun”, I vote for the latter claim:

8.1) Remove Stalemate from the draw rules.

8.2) Remove Suicide ban from the draw rules.

Claim #8.2 is not so important, but I’d enjoy it also. Players are allowed to eg suicide their Queens, why not the Kings also?

To add further fuel to “Stalemate = Zugzwang” chess, the game of Go is sometimes advertised as better than chess because of less draws. They even ban infinite repetitions to increase win %.

More fuel: we esteem accuracy, or at least bluffing accuracy if eg Mikhail Tal comes to mind! So we should seek to maximize the accuracy of measuring differences in player skills & gifts. Stalemate always favors the lesser player, because lesser control of the board, less material, or so.

With no stalemate, every pawn advantage would be winning. Two Knights could win. One Bishop or Knight could win. Why oh why do they now not win? Remove Stalemate please! And add “Victory chess” ie “anti-Draw chess” ie “StaleMove chess” or whatever its name would be, as a variant !?

AQ (Asked Questions):

Q: “Stalemated won, in 1 part of history! To punish for slacking in victory!”

A: Stalemate winning? Punishment is:

1st you play to win by reducing enemy material.

2nd… you fail.

3rd you start playing to win by reducing your own material to get stalemated?

Why? Most breaks of the logical continuum are bad. Stalemated getting victory is bad. Draw is less bad. Defeat is best.

STALEMATE POINTS AWARD LESS THAN 1 BUT MORE THAN ½:

4/4 point for checkmate.

3/4 points for stalemater,

2/4 points for draw,

1/4 points for stalemated,

0/4 points for defeat.

I’d still keep the logical continuum simplest it can, and award full 1 point for stalemate because again, why break the move compulsion rule? Why introduce an artificial extra rule (direction for logic) for “Stalemate = not Victory”? Why break it at all in the name of more draws, when so many players complain “too many draws” among the most influential players ?

 

2.Randomize beginning color of pieces:

so it would sometimes be “blacks to play with initiative” = Equalism + (Variety = less color memory + more generic method).

 

3.Changing the names between Kings and Queens:

Why is the Queen the most powerful mover, when Men obviously fit that description more, and Men are the ones protecting the Queens more often! So:

King = Queen

Queen = King

Goal = mate the Queen (which moves as traditional Kings do, while new realistic Kings move as traditional Queens do)

 

4.Change all chess terms into various, more civilian oriented topics, OR more war orienteds:

4.1.CIVILIAN ORIENTED:

Kings = THE female

Queens = Alpha males

Pawns = Losers (Omega males)

Capturing = Redirecting

And so on !?

4.2.WAR ORIENTED:

Pawns = Troopers

Officers = Special Forces —> (sorry for English chess language’s homonyms; in Finnish we differentiate “Pieces = Officers + Soldiers”, instead of “Pieces = Pieces + Pawns”. Heteronyms produce faster learning and less confusion.

Capturing Squares = Capturing

Capturing Pieces =  Killing, Felling, etc

Counter = Revenge, Equalization

5.TAKEBACKS TILL WIN chess (with Engines especially):

Count how many Takeback-variations you need, to beat eg Stockfish in a game. Delete no variations; after getting disadvantage, proven by Your knowledge of the game, go back to “Your Last Reasonable Candidate move & variation”, at where you last thought you had a playable game: equality or chaos, and choose another candidate.

As your chosen variation gets disadvantaged, go back and choose another candidate. Keep going until another disadvantage proven.

Repeat the following pattern:

1.Disadvantage falsifies candidate variation–> 2.Back to Last Reasonable Candidate –> 3.Disadvantage falsifies –> 4.Last Reasonable Candidate, OR earlier candidate if all later candidates falsified –> 5.Disadvantage falsifies –> 6.Earlier Candidate –> etc.

Fill the gametree with your attempts to beat Stockfish!

Learn openings while doing this,

Learn style while doing this,

and finally, after x takebacks, get to beat Stockfish!

 

6.DICE MOVE CHESS:

Pick any 6 or 3 or 2 candidate moves.

Throw a dice on which move you must play.

 

7.DICE MOVE DISTANCE CHESS:

Throw a dice on how many squares your selected Piece can move in 1 move.

 

8.DICE PIECE SELECTION CHESS:

Throw a dice on which type of Piece you must move: 1 = pawn, 2 = knight, 3 = bishop, 4 = rook, 5 = queen, 6 = king.