/cult/ - culture and media

I play chess. I suck though.

When i was starting getting into chess i learned that rule that auto-draws if you force the opponent put himself into a mate position.
To me that is retarded, the game doesn't allow a player to play -if that player is forced to make himself lose-. I lost all interest in chess because of that and also that if the 2 players play perfectly whoever begun will win.

I never liked chess. I hate the way that the cowardly aristocracy and their allies force the peasants up front to do the bulk of the dying. If the pawns on both sides got together, and maybe convinced the rooks to take out the generals and the clergy, the whole board could be a democracy in a few dozen moves.

Alice appears to have some soykaf against chess….

>>1598
You lost interest in chess because of one rule, in which the only time the rule would be applicable would be if one player had a lot more foresight than the other—in other words, if someone was a genius and could force someone to check themselves.

To my knowledge, it hasn't been proved yet that standard chess is a white win. Yes, white has an advantage because it plays first. That's not a proof, though.

Basically, you hate chess because you think it's a waste of time, that even if you train to play as perfectly as you could, the result is predetermined in which color you play as. You can't rely on your opponent to mess up, so if you end up playing white then you automatically lose.

To me, why is that important? Chess is a game of strategy, but it's also a game to enjoy with people. Look at the professional chess players today. Nobody plays "perfectly" and it ultimately is a game requiring a lot of strategic skill and forward thinking.

>>1599
I have a hard time telling if you are soykafposting or being serious.

>>1601
2 posts don't make a consensus…

You don't need to be a genius to do that, just to have 2 pieces against 1; i don't know why you think so.
The idea behind the rule is important to me, not the frequency of the situation.

It has not been proved, i'm connecting dots. If 2 players have the perfect gameplan whoever starts wins as that person will always be one move closer to victory.

Don't put words in my mouth, what you just wrote is trash. 3/4 of your reply are about the last 10 words of my post.
I don't hate chess nor do i think it is a waste of time, i simply expected something it is not and lost interest.

>>1591
i have not played chess in a long time but i like it. i think it would be cool to have a Alice plays chess night. chill and play some chess over the wire. could be cool.

>>1599
Why not play an alternate version of chess where the white side is as usual but the black side is all knights? White loses in checkmate as normal because without their monarch they are nothing but black doesn't lose until the very last citizen falls. And it's knights not pawns, because every citizen is a warrior and an equal and there need be pawns no more.

(also your knowledge of medieval times is sketchy; peasants didn't fight at all, only members of the nobility did)

Are you talking about stalemate, mate?

>>1598
The auto-draw rule keeps the game interesting for longer, even if you are down in material you can still play for a stalemate. Without it a lot more games would end as soon as the first player blundered.
>>1599
Chess is an abstract game, the piece names and designs are convention to help new players learn the rules more quickly.

I played shogi for a few years but i still suck at it. I think it's a brilliant game, i enjoy it very much. If i remember correctly, it is the only type of chess in which still a human is the champion, not an AI.

I play a lot of Chess and I've been wanting to get into Go, but it's hard to do so when you only speak English. I see them as interlocking in what they do, it's two different ways of thinking about similar problems of strategy and geometry.

>>1605
>peasants didn't fight at all
this is also inaccurate.

Not only were peasants often levied as foot soldiers, peasants sometimes formed their own armies and overthrew kings they didn't like.

Interestingly, they usually didn't bother setting up a new political system, they just got rid of whatever jackass was in charge and sometimes put up their own peasant king.

>>1591
>Does Alice play chess? What kind of chess? For how long have you played?
I'm a big fan of the Pratchett-Vimes Ruleset. The pawns on both sides of the board band together, talk the rooks around to their side, and overthrow their aristocratic overlords. The board becomes a republic in about a dozen moves.

i'm an 1800-2400 player and i love the indian queen defense