Tweet
On another thread, someone said I was comparing chess to tennis (I wasn't, I was comparing the two Canadian federations). But this got my creativity going and....
Late last night I thought of a hybrid tennis / chess game. You start out playing tennis, and at the side of the court is a chess board with the starting position (protected by errant tennis balls by a glass casing, perhaps, with pieces magnetically held to their squares). One of the players is assigned White and the other Black.
Someone has first serve, and keeps serving until one either player takes a 2-point lead (exactly what happens in the deuce situation in regular tennis). To keep it short, maybe if they were tied after 6 serves, have a 7th sudden death point to decide it. Whoever wins gets to make a chess move. Thus the chess game could actually begin with Black moving first.
The serve then switches, score is reset to 0-0, and again, play tennis until either player takes a 2-point lead, or wins the 7th sudden death point. Winner again makes a chess move, even if it's the same player as before. Each of these tennis segments is called a "move game".
There is no keeping track of the tennis score except as described above. The match is decided on the chessboard, using all standard chess rules except that the turn is decided continuously by the tennis, AND if your opponent makes a move that puts your King in check and then wins the next tennis segment to get another move, s/he captures your King and the match is over.
What this means is:
(1) if you are the vastly superior tennis player, you'd have to be pretty bad at chess to lose or draw
(2) if you are the vastly superior chess player, you'd have to be quite a bit worse (but not necessarily bad) at tennis to lose
(3) if evenly matched in tennis, chess skills would primarily decide, because the server wins most of the tennis points.
Strategy would involve switching from offense to defense when you get a move back after your opponent got 2 or moves in a row, and vice-versa when you yourself get 2 or more moves in a row.
I propose a name for this new hybrid sport: Racquet Chess.
Perhaps a new starting position, in which each King is much more protected, would be necessary to avoid early 4-move mates. In fact, strategy might include intentionally losing a few tennis segments in a row to lull your opponent into a speculative King hunt, then winning a few tennis segments and decimating your opponent's ill-defended position.
Pawn promotions would probably be more frequent as well. Once you have a pawn that's just 2 squares away and unblocked, you just need win 2 tennis move games in a row.
Of course, this concept isn't limited to combining tennis and chess. Any game in which individual games are always decisive and generally short could be used. You could even play teams, and use 4-player euchre or bridge hands to determine each move, and you and your teammate would jointly decide on strategies and moves.
Late last night I thought of a hybrid tennis / chess game. You start out playing tennis, and at the side of the court is a chess board with the starting position (protected by errant tennis balls by a glass casing, perhaps, with pieces magnetically held to their squares). One of the players is assigned White and the other Black.
Someone has first serve, and keeps serving until one either player takes a 2-point lead (exactly what happens in the deuce situation in regular tennis). To keep it short, maybe if they were tied after 6 serves, have a 7th sudden death point to decide it. Whoever wins gets to make a chess move. Thus the chess game could actually begin with Black moving first.
The serve then switches, score is reset to 0-0, and again, play tennis until either player takes a 2-point lead, or wins the 7th sudden death point. Winner again makes a chess move, even if it's the same player as before. Each of these tennis segments is called a "move game".
There is no keeping track of the tennis score except as described above. The match is decided on the chessboard, using all standard chess rules except that the turn is decided continuously by the tennis, AND if your opponent makes a move that puts your King in check and then wins the next tennis segment to get another move, s/he captures your King and the match is over.
What this means is:
(1) if you are the vastly superior tennis player, you'd have to be pretty bad at chess to lose or draw
(2) if you are the vastly superior chess player, you'd have to be quite a bit worse (but not necessarily bad) at tennis to lose
(3) if evenly matched in tennis, chess skills would primarily decide, because the server wins most of the tennis points.
Strategy would involve switching from offense to defense when you get a move back after your opponent got 2 or moves in a row, and vice-versa when you yourself get 2 or more moves in a row.
I propose a name for this new hybrid sport: Racquet Chess.
Perhaps a new starting position, in which each King is much more protected, would be necessary to avoid early 4-move mates. In fact, strategy might include intentionally losing a few tennis segments in a row to lull your opponent into a speculative King hunt, then winning a few tennis segments and decimating your opponent's ill-defended position.
Pawn promotions would probably be more frequent as well. Once you have a pawn that's just 2 squares away and unblocked, you just need win 2 tennis move games in a row.
Of course, this concept isn't limited to combining tennis and chess. Any game in which individual games are always decisive and generally short could be used. You could even play teams, and use 4-player euchre or bridge hands to determine each move, and you and your teammate would jointly decide on strategies and moves.
Comment