chess

William Hartston
Thursday 09 November 1995 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Americans are getting restless. After the booing that greeted some draws of the Kasparov-Anand match in New York, mutterings have been heard about changing the rules.

The first suggestion, advocated in Daniel King's book of the match, adapts the standard US solution to all problems: if something doesn't work, throw money at it. The idea is to have a large proportion of the prize money linked to decisive results in individual games. Each draw increases the pot for the next game, like a rolled-over lottery.

While that might enthuse the spectators, however, it will hardly motivate the players, who know very well that a world title is worth far more than the winner's purse.

Another idea, supported in Raymond Keene's book, is to replay draws at fast time limits. Which could turn a 20-game match into 7 slow games and 13 quick games. Fun to watch, but no test of true chess skill.

Here's the best all-American answer, combining the essential ingredients of money and speed: a draw scores 1/4-point to each contestant and - here's the clever bit - the contestants personally refund the entry fee to the spectators. The remaining half-point is then contested in a rapid replay. Another draw would add 1/8-point to the scores and put more money in the spectators' pockets. Well, it would stop the booing.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in