Tweet
In post #19 in the thread Opera Euro Rapid 2021, Brad Thomson wrote the following:
"Not long ago many of us were complaining about all of the boring draws in chess. Now the time controls have been radically sped up, more blunders take place as a result, which leads to more decisive games, and thus no one complains. It seems that we prefer bad chess to good. Bad is exciting but good is boring."
Of course what he is referring to is the growing tendency towards blitz and rapid events at the top levels of chess. Since so many draws are happening at these levels in slow time controls, organizers have increased events with shorter time controls, pursuing a greater quantify of decisive games.
What this got me to thinking was about some rule change that could provide a "new" chess that would not replace normal chess, but become a side by side alternative. Perhaps (if it actually became popular) it would have its top level events at times when normal chess is in a quiet period of top level events.
So here is the rule change, and it is quite simple yet quite substantial: Whenever two Pawns are blockading each other, either Pawn has extra move options that it doesn't have in normal chess. These options are to discourage totally blockaded Pawn formations. So the extra moves are the normal capturing move, that is moving diagonally forward to either the left or the right, but in this case, the move may be made to an EMPTY SQUARE. In other words, a capturing move without any capturing. Also, to make it even more interesting, the blockaded Pawn may move 1 square to either side. If it does this from its starting square, it still maintains the option to move 2 squares on it's first FORWARD move.
These options are only available when Pawns are blocked from forward moving by enemy Pawns. Being blocked by enemy Pieces does not allow these options. The logic is that Pieces are eventually going to want to move away and clear the blockade, but Pawns under normal chess rules cannot unless a capture presents itself. It is my thought that Pawns blocking Pawns is one reason why chess has become rather static and drawish.
Obviously this change would dramatically affect all stages of a chess game: opening, middlegame, endgame. It would create a whole new version of chess, which by the way I tentatively call NBP Chess (Non-Blocking Pawns Chess).
It could be that someone else in chess history has already proposed this rule change, and if so, I hope somebody can point it out. So for now, I don't claim to be the originator of the idea. But I would like to hear opinions on how NBP Chess would differ from regular chess. Well, obviously one thing is opening theory would have to be developed from scratch.That alone means a lot less draws and some very interesting games for decades to come, I think. Pawn endgames would also be changed. Many of the drawn Pawn endgames might not be drawn any more.
One thing for sure is that Pawns will have more opportunity to reach their 8th rank and promote. It will take pieces to blockade them. Passed Pawns will still exist, and will be created more easily. I think this would make the game more exciting.
So in addition to thinking of this idea, I have also created a software engine to play it. I modified an engine I had coded in the past, a normal chess engine which played around 2000 level I think. It was easy to make the rule change in the code. I have just tried playing a few games and already it looks very interesting. Soon I will post in this thread some games played by this engine.
"Not long ago many of us were complaining about all of the boring draws in chess. Now the time controls have been radically sped up, more blunders take place as a result, which leads to more decisive games, and thus no one complains. It seems that we prefer bad chess to good. Bad is exciting but good is boring."
Of course what he is referring to is the growing tendency towards blitz and rapid events at the top levels of chess. Since so many draws are happening at these levels in slow time controls, organizers have increased events with shorter time controls, pursuing a greater quantify of decisive games.
What this got me to thinking was about some rule change that could provide a "new" chess that would not replace normal chess, but become a side by side alternative. Perhaps (if it actually became popular) it would have its top level events at times when normal chess is in a quiet period of top level events.
So here is the rule change, and it is quite simple yet quite substantial: Whenever two Pawns are blockading each other, either Pawn has extra move options that it doesn't have in normal chess. These options are to discourage totally blockaded Pawn formations. So the extra moves are the normal capturing move, that is moving diagonally forward to either the left or the right, but in this case, the move may be made to an EMPTY SQUARE. In other words, a capturing move without any capturing. Also, to make it even more interesting, the blockaded Pawn may move 1 square to either side. If it does this from its starting square, it still maintains the option to move 2 squares on it's first FORWARD move.
These options are only available when Pawns are blocked from forward moving by enemy Pawns. Being blocked by enemy Pieces does not allow these options. The logic is that Pieces are eventually going to want to move away and clear the blockade, but Pawns under normal chess rules cannot unless a capture presents itself. It is my thought that Pawns blocking Pawns is one reason why chess has become rather static and drawish.
Obviously this change would dramatically affect all stages of a chess game: opening, middlegame, endgame. It would create a whole new version of chess, which by the way I tentatively call NBP Chess (Non-Blocking Pawns Chess).
It could be that someone else in chess history has already proposed this rule change, and if so, I hope somebody can point it out. So for now, I don't claim to be the originator of the idea. But I would like to hear opinions on how NBP Chess would differ from regular chess. Well, obviously one thing is opening theory would have to be developed from scratch.That alone means a lot less draws and some very interesting games for decades to come, I think. Pawn endgames would also be changed. Many of the drawn Pawn endgames might not be drawn any more.
One thing for sure is that Pawns will have more opportunity to reach their 8th rank and promote. It will take pieces to blockade them. Passed Pawns will still exist, and will be created more easily. I think this would make the game more exciting.
So in addition to thinking of this idea, I have also created a software engine to play it. I modified an engine I had coded in the past, a normal chess engine which played around 2000 level I think. It was easy to make the rule change in the code. I have just tried playing a few games and already it looks very interesting. Soon I will post in this thread some games played by this engine.
Comment