Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7444556" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Just because i am tired of seeing this but...Is it your proposition, or the proposition of the umpteen before you on this thread, that **the reason chess is interesting** to those who like it and not dull or boring is the imbalance caused by the first move then? Because thats what the post you are challenging with this "first move imbalnce" epiphany was challenging - that an equal challenge game would be dull or boring.If chess gave black a offsetting "extra move on move 12" to even out the tempo advantage white had. And that resulted in relative 50/50 results between equal players at top tier - would that mean chess was boring? Would moves 1-11 be fun then the game shift into dull unplayable land?In go, they use komi to equalize the outcomes to a degree - to offset the tempo edge - but hinestly having played games with komi and without i did not see any major  "boring" chants from the fans during komi games.and chants of "this is awesome" during the non-komi ones.For the vast majority of player who play chess and go (and monopoly and risk and settlers of catan and Frag and Munchkin Fantasy i suppose) the skill levels of both players are not so perfect as to make the biggest determinant of win-liss-draw or fun-boring lay at the feet of that first move.The premise that a game that is nalanced is boring is so far an unsupported one, but, since it is in fact little more than a statement of preference or likes - its not provable.What would imo be boring or dull would be a game where choices did not matter - where no matter the combo of choices between foes - the sum total result was the same - which is one form of static, dead equality that i suggest wad the nominal imagining behind the "dull" position.Man, i should not post right after waking.</blockquote>

Verification