Chess isn't quite there yet

That's an interesting modification There are 11 or so decent responses to 1. d4, though (Nf6, e6, d5, a6, c6, f5, d6, h6, b6, c5, Nc6). And of course, I'd just play 1. e3 with White in your variation instead of risking to be told by the RNG to play one of the terrible moves 1. Nc3, 1. b3, 1. g3 and 1. f4 (that give Black at least equality after most of his randomised replies).

I'd leave out the non-developing h6 and a6 in your list above. Also I'd say those 4 moves are hardly terrible, such that black can do better than against 1.e3, which black can just make his best reply against.

Is there some strategy white can follow to guarantee at least a draw, where the strategy is simple enough for a human GM to execute it reliably? If not, I don't see what the problem is. If so, they should be able to do it against chess engines, but I'm pretty sure at this point they'd just lose every game.

Human beings lack the mental capacity to ruin the game of chess for themselves. Though I can easily imagine games between chess engines eventually requiring some sort of opening restriction, because otherwise white can draw at will.

The problem is that the endgame in US-based matches is way too late in the European evening so it's desirable that games end faster on average

They keep White's minor pieces away from g5 and b5 where they'd otherwise be able to appear naturally, so these moves lose less than a tempo and aren't as bad as h5 and a5.

Time for a Van't Kruijs thematic tourney on lichess?

The thing is that 1. e3 can easily transpose into the Exchange French (1... e5 2. d4 exd4 3. exd4 d5), or the Colle (vs d5), or the Reti (vs Nf6), or some kind of QGD, which are all playable with White.

Anyway, the list of randomised moves is customisable, the idea itself is good.

The problem is much more easily solved imo by faster time controls. Have them play 36 or something games but make them two hours each.

I think its an interesting alternative to faster time controls, which we can also have in different events. With openings by lot we can still have deep, beautiful chess without a lot of time forced errors. But we avoid situation where players are so highly prepared, and much of the game is decided off the board, including not only specific opening moves, but also typical middlegame plans, and even which endgames are likely.

I did have someone who used to play 1.e3 against me with the idea of playing 2.d4 and sometimes a Stonewall with f4.

1.Nc3 can become a closed Sicilian, a Veresov, or a Vienna, which are all playable.

I'm just saying that there is no way 1.Nc3, or the others mentioned, are so terrible that Black is getting an edge with best play. And if playing 1.e3, or any other move is generally preferable to rolling the dice on the list, then it needs to be added to the list.

Indeed, 1. Nc3 is playable, just I have an irrational allergy for blocking the c-pawn so early

Anyway, I should focus on poker because I'm not going to achieve anything spectacular in chess anyway.

Or, as Jan put it,



Or just give more press to the existing World Rapid and Blitz Championships.

Btw, Magnus is likely to lose the rapid title on the Christmas holidays in Doha - the classical championship will have taken too much of his energy.

The number of games, especially in the blitz part of the championship, should be more, though. 15 rapid and 21 blitz rounds don't allow for as much entertainment as these championships would be capable of giving if it were a bit longer.

Seeing tactics occur when one of the sides has to win, I'm thinking about ways to make Armageddon more balanced while giving equal clock times to both sides (so that the calculation of an ideal handicap for longer games isn't a problem).

An adjustment I've thought of is to set the following ways to win (with no draws):

with White - by checkmate, stalemate*, resignation and on time;

with Black - all of the above ways plus threefold repetition, the 50-move rule and leaving White's king naked.

* In mutual stalemate situations, declare the side who made the last move as the winner.

I guess, treating stalemate as a win (like once upon a time in India) would improve White's practical winrate in Armageddon with equal clock times, as it would make the conversion of an extra pawn much easier (usually as easy as exchanging all the pieces).

What would a mutual stalemate look like?

An unhappy marriage.

My bad - it's called a double stalemate.

hm, never heard of that before. neat idea for puzzles though.

The following is a currently live stream of GM Gurevich playing a 47 game blindfolded simul for the new Guiness record:

https://www.twitch.tv/blindfoldchess

I don't know what are they feeding those kids in Uzbekistan...

Nodirbek Yakubboev 2432 (2002)

Nodirbek Abdusattorov 2428 (2004)

Javokhir Sindarov 2384 (2005).

I am really curious as to who is coaching them all - probably a foreign import? Any info about that?

Two of them are named Nodirbek, so I'd begin by researching the psychological effects of the name Nodirbek on chess development in early age. The third's name has the same number of letters and arrangement of consonants and vowels, which is extremely suspicious. They seem to be getting stronger relative to age, so the Uzbeks must be refining their formula well.

Went and played over the board tonight for the first time in... God, no idea. 10 years? Played 14 3+2 blitz games, scoring 7.5.

Had real trouble at first remembering how to play on a 3D board. Sorted it out by the end though.

Next week: Allegro! Now I have to remember the openings I used to play before the nonsense that I took up for blitz.

Debate with a friend. Black to move: is this a draw?

This does look like a draw. Black has to play 1... h2 (otherwise White can play Nf1 and stop the pawn on the h2 square inaccessible to Black's bishop). After this, Black can't lose. White's knight is tied to the h-pawn, Black can win him with Bb7 but may even let him stay on the board for a while to save a tempo.

It's White who has to be careful, but he does hold the position easily with 2. f4 exf4 3. Bxf4 g5 (Black has to play g5 now to prevent the Nh1 discovered attack on h2) 4. Be3 etc. (4. Bd6? f5 5. Nh1 f4 is winning for Black) - on e3, the bishop controls f4 and g5 and that will become a deadly drawn opposite colour bishop endgame once Black decides to trade the h-pawn for the knight - the kings are both away from the centre and will be both centralised in time.

Im playing in an otb allegro tourney with renowned youtuber MATO JELIC.

I may even get drawn against him this round. We're both 2-0 I think. I beat two kids fairly unconvincingly and will now be moved up to where they respect my raises. By that I mean moved up to where I get crushed.

No offense, but wtf is an "allegro" tourney? Is that the same as rapid? Best of luck vs Mr. Jelic, if you do get to play him

Yeah seems to be an Australian term. It's somewhere around 15-30 minutes for the game. In this case, 15 mins w/ 2 sec increment.

Ended up 2-3 btw :/ Got annihilated by a much better player game 3, threw away a winning position game 4. Game 5 I had what seemed like a good attack but not sure if there was a win there. Lost on time.

How well did Mato do in this tourney?

Meanwhile, Wesley So has entered the 2800+ club and yet there's no thread about the London Classic