Will You Try Advanced Scoring to Solve the Draw Problem in Chess?

At the highest level of chess competition, many games end as draws according to the traditional scoring system. Since general audience perceives them as boring, we frequently see complaints about the “draw problem” in our favorite game. The world championship match between Caruana and Carlsen is a typical example because all 12 classical games were undecided.

Like it or not, draws are unavoidable without serious errors, and top players will not be able to win their games regardless of incentives. Since draws usually reflect near-perfect play, we must analyze them more carefully. Did one player have material advantage at the end? The answer is: “Yes!” for approximately one third of draws. Obviously, that player was better, but the advantage was insufficient for a win. For example, two Knights cannot force a checkmate, and the opponent with bare King gets the same half-point. Is it fair that we do not use any distinction?

Aside from the fairness issue, we can increase the number of “decided” games by implementing Venceslav Rutar Scoring. All chess rules remain the same. After a game is finished, material balance is calculated by adding 1 unit for each remaining Pawn, 3 units for each Bishop or Knight, 5 units for each Rook, and 9 units for each Queen. All positional considerations are ignored. If material is balanced, the outcome is called Equal Draw, and each player receives 2 points. Favored Draw, mini-win worth 3 points, is given to the player with material advantage while the opponent receives only 1 point for Disfavored Draw, mini-loss. Attractive Win, worth 6 points, occurs when one side wins despite material deficiency. Typically, this means that a checkmating attack followed after sacrifices. As an additional incentive for daring play, “Rule 33” can be implemented: “If perpetual check is initiated before move 33, the game ends as Equal Draw regardless of material balance. Perpetual check is a series of checks leading to a draw by 3-fold repetition or 50-move rule.” Attacking players have an option to escape into a draw with 2 points when their sacrifices fail. Wins with equal material or advantage receive 5 points and all losses 0 points.

Venceslav Rutar Scoring can be used at all levels of competition and with any time control. It is also compatible with Fischer Random and possibly other variants. So far, the new system was tested by three grandmaster and two internet influencers. Altogether, 22 exhibition games were played. There were 3 Favored and 5 Equal Draws. The number of wins was 14, mostly because games were played at rapid time controls. Errors, especially during time scrambles, were the main contributors to a high number of wins. However, the scoring system directly affected at least two games. The player had a difficult position and decided against sacrificing material for a holdable endgame because Disfavored Draw would give him only 1 point. Those games continued and were eventually lost. Initial testing clearly demonstrated increase of the number of decided games without any obvious drawbacks.

Practical instructions to players should emphasize that they must simply play good chess. During the opening and middle game, they must seize initiative to gain positional and material advantage as the first step towards winning. Checkmating sacrifices are always risky although Attractive Win looks like a strong incentive. In bad positions, all choices are depressing, and sacrificing for a draw means at most 1 point at the end. The scoring system will punish loss of material more severely because even traditionally drawn endgames will not be scored as Equal Draws.

At the beginning of the game, six outcomes are possible. At some point, however, the lofty goal of checkmating becomes unattainable, and the focus must shift to maintaining or gaining material advantage for 3 points. This transition may become quite challenging when seemingly “dead draws” convert into exciting battles. In so many Pawn-down endgames, sacrificing a piece for the last two opposing Pawns assures a traditional draw although the opponent retains a Bishop or Knight. With the new system, material advantage leads to Favored Draw.

If you are interested to know more, I will send you a complete set of rules and detailed discussions. Especially, I would appreciate your help with additional exhibition matches or tournaments. I am aware of the fact that my proposal is disruptive and initially difficult to accept. And also, it looks complicated until you see it in practice, but games are played as regular chess with added complexity of decision making. Chess can be refreshed!

1 Like

I won’t be able to help you, yet I’m thankful that somebody has an idea to revolutionize the scoring module. It gives white a better chance to come equal to opposing black which has more chances to get the overall win.

When you talk about the 22 exhibition games it reminds me that to me there are 23 perfect (that’s what I call it) games. 1 WW 2D 20BW. This what you’re talking about is can white mitigate the pieces it would lose?

This too could give wall charts more legitimacy on the players’ choice of opening placements. Would it be possible for one color to win yet the piece advantage in the end is w/ the losing side. The use of byes could be reinvented.

1 Like

Does this alternative also affect the ratings system? With 6 outcomes possible, do all these results still sum to 1 point per game on the wall chart? If not are there changes needed to the calculation of rating adjustments?

The US Chess ratings system does not care about pairings, total score, or prizes. It just rates the ratable games that were played

1 Like

Exhibition games were unrated so far. Players were motivated by financial prizes directly tied to their results. During the testing period of the Venceslav Rutar Scoring system, the main goal is to verify advantages. After gaining wider acceptance, rating implications may become important. As the first step, I simply propose calculations based on wins and draws as in traditional system. If I understand the current situation correctly, some tournament organizers use the “soccer scoring” (3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw) for official standings, but values 1 and 1/2 are entered for rating calculations.

Thank you @Venceslav_Rutar for this clarification.