Thursday 1 March 2012

Time for a Change?

Last night I watched Raymond Keene, the second British Chess player to be awarded the title of Grandmaster, play twenty games of chess at once. In each game he was the white player, which as I mentioned previously should give him a very slight advantage. Unfortunately I missed the start of his games so I don't know what his initial move was, but I do know what mine would have been. The King's pawn would have moved forward two squares to e4. I begin almost all my games of chess with this move, the reason for this is simple, when I was taught how to play I was told that this is a good strong starting move. From my personal experience this seems to be true, but I have never actually sat down and given it any due thought, rather I have just accepted the validity of this statement and gone from there.

This make me wonder what would I do if the layout of the board was different, say for example the knights and bishops were swapped over, moving the piece forward does nothing to the possible move set of the knight so would this still be the best move? Maybe it's time we played chess differently, how about instead of placing the pieces in the standard positions we randomise the placement of the non-pawn pieces? Not only would this force us to think about our pieces and what kind of game could develop but it would also remove the symmetry associated with the standard layout. It would now be possible for a player to have both bishops on the same coloured squares and if their opponent notices then they could exploit this.

Part of what appeals to me about trying this type of game is that it wouldn't be fair and even, players would be forced to make the best of a bad situation, and try their best to capitalise on any advantage they see. It would add the excitement of slowly clawing back a game that you looked destined to lose right from the start. I enjoy these kinds of challenges, which is part of the reason I don't just lose interest and give up when a game isn't going my way. I was playing a game of Carcassonne against opponents who have a poor track record against me, when they decided that they should all gang up against me. So every time the option to remove a meeple from the board arose mine was removed. Rather than get annoyed I found it hilarious good fun as I was made to work for every point and took a minor victory in still being able to get over 50 points, although this was still last place by a long way.

I guess my point is that the fun of a game comes not from the winning or losing but rather the path taken to get there. Which is why I have no problems playing unfair but intellectually stimulating games.

No comments:

Post a Comment