Well, now Chess can proudly put the Dice Tower Seal of Approval on the box cover and probably sell some more copies.

I'm holding out for the Chess Big Box, with 40% bigger board, storage insert and 6 mini-expansions.

It's worth pointing out that playing online (on any of the big chess websites) largely solves the skill mismatch problem. Once you've played a few games, you'll get matched against people of similar skill levels. It's also helpful for beginners because it won't let you play illegal moves!

Very cool to see some classic games on the channel, a nice break from the continues flow of hot releases. I hope they will do more of these.

Chess also has great components! If they were just flat disks with an image on them it wouldn't be as nice. The traditional wood pieces are usually of great size and weight.

If chess was invented today we'd say, "Wow, I wish more games had wooden boards and weighted pieces so beautifully carved I could polish them!" Skill imbalance can be a problem but chess clubs and online chess apps will match you against someone of similar skill. As an experienced amateur I can say that it's a privilege to play and learn from someone much better than you - much like learning from a 'Master' in, say, Karate. Chess does lend itself to study and there are many websites about chess strategy (much like there are for video games). The appreciation of strategy is for me the most enjoyable part of chess (even more than winning) - seeing a carefully prepared strategy succeed is like seeing a beautiful building whose blueprints were long in the making.

I hope there will be reviews like this for Go and Shogi ! :D

I'm agree with Zee: Chess is awesome as long as you play with people around your skill level, otherwise it's REALLY frustrating.

I think this is my favorite game of all time. I'm not super good at chess, maybe a bit better than average, but I certainly haven't studied openings or endgames in any serious depth. At the end of the day, it's an elegant, simple game that has stood the test of time and thorough computer analysis, and I would even have fun playing grand masters because of the sheer spectacle of their skill.

The 3 "rule exceptions" of chess are easily understood in context of the "the meta." Castling: OK, so many players are doing this positional swap with the king and rook, that it is boring, so we'll just let them do it as a single move (once certain conditions are met and you can't use it to get out of check). Double-move for pawns: OK, so many players are moving their pawns twice in a row, it's just wasting time, so we'll just let them do it as a single move. Capturing En Passant: Well, that double-move thing can be used to avoid capture, so we'll let the other player capture the pawn, but only if they do it right away (which they could have done if the pawn was only allowed a single move). (And BTW, I suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck at chess.)

There's a lot of games that have either been unaffected or hindered by the internet, I think chess is one game that has been bolstered and improved, at least in the grand scheme of things. Chess puzzles, a worldwide player base, chess tutorials, observations, chess youtubers, chess variants that were too much overhead for physical games (like fog of war chess), reduced price, chess engines (this one is good and bad), chess studies, chess forums, chess communities, chess teaching, asynchronous chess. I think this game was able to do this because if it's worldwide appeal, player base and status in society. There are enough people to make innovations in this space of modernizing the chess community

Great conversation. I agree that chess's biggest flaw is the massive skill differences between potential players. But if you enjoy playing online, that problem is pretty much solved these days - the big chess websites have millions of players, and you are matched up by skill level automatically, and within a few seconds. And for those into learning about the game, the past 10 years has seen an explosion of streamers and chess content creators that provide a ton of content about the game. (Pretty much all of my KZfaq viewing these days is either board game content or chess content.) 10/10 for me.

Cool seeing an actual review of chess as if it was a game that just came out (sort of). I'm looking forward to the review of Go next. 🙂

My chess teacher gave the students a challenge of playing all 20 at the same time. He spent 20 seconds at each board before moving to the next, so you had a few mins to decide. I got to the last two... but he defeated everyone. I haven't really got into chess since

Excellent review, love seeing these classics in the mix. Can't wait for the Go review.

If Chess came out today, I think it would be released with 2 sets of rules: the rules we all know (probably missing the en passant rule), and Chess960. And I really think Chess960 would be the core game played by 98% of people playing as it is much more interesting. Having Chess960 viewed as the 'real' game would reduce the possibility of people trying to solve the game, as no pre-game stratagems could really be made (the abstract game's version of deck building). Having Chess (and not Chess960) as the main game is like having a deck builder where the game allows you to stack the deck in some order during setup, Chess960 fixes this. Would Chess/Chess960 make a splash upon initial release, probably not, but I don't think it would be ignored either.

When I saw this on my feed I had to check if I fell asleep a few weeks and woke up on April 1.

Finally covering the new hotness.

Expecting next time I'm in a big box store to see a quote from Zee Garcia on the back of the Chess box.

In tournament chess players don't actually verbally announce ''check''. For one, it would create a cacophony in the tournament hall if everyone was saying check all the time. Also, it's kind of respecting your opponent to not say the word and acknowledging that they should realize it themselves that they are in check. I think it's happened to me once where I didn't realize it for whatever reason (I probable went down in the rabbit hole thinking about my next move for 25 mins and ''forgot'' my king was in check) and my opponent stopped my move by saying I wasn't allowed to play that because my king was in check... Boy was I embarrassed to have missed it... But yeah, in tournament ''long'' chess where each player has like 3 hours or so to play the whole game, you have the time to realize when your king is in check lol

I have to admit that I do not easily play chess because I do not know the best strategic moves and I do not feel the need to dive into them, but a few years ago I learned about 'Paco Sako'. It is chess with the same peaces, but with changed rules that you do not take your opponent's pieces, but they start to dance with each other. The goal is to dance with your opponent's King. It is the peaceful version that I like a lot, because you can make combo's. When you can move with a single pawn to a dancing couple. You can free your other pawn to directly move to an other space. When it is an other couple, you can create a chain reaction. Certainly worth to check out!

You banged it out of the park when you said 'It cannot be played casually for fun on a consistent basis without knowing exactly that the level of your opponent is similar to yours' Just spot on. And that player also needs to be someone you like playing with, narrowing it further.

I am looking forward to the expansion on kickstarter

Really interesting to see the group's opinions on it! I think the discussion around "check" was a bit off though. Announcing your opponent is in check isn't so much announcing that you're about to win, since you can't win off of check - your opponent must most out of check on their turn if they are able (otherwise it is checkmate and they have lost). Announcing your opponent is in check is basically saying "I'm forcing you to make a move (which hopefully I've planned on you making and will take advantage of to help me beat you)." And similarly, there is a ton of sneakiness in the game - but it isn't so much "I hope you didn't notice where my piece is," as "I hope you didn't notice that in three more moves I'm going to be able to mess your stuff up based on how I'm positioning my pieces and forcing you to move."

If you want to play chess against people of your strength, you usually need to go to a chess club (or play online, it will give you opponents at your skill level). In a chess club, usually you don't announce "check", because your opponent is expected to see that. If he doesn't, then you notify him/her. Also, you need to play hundreds of chess games, it will open up the more you play. Most modern boardgames get "samey" after 30-40 plays ...

First of all, you do not have to announce 'Check'. That is simply courtesy, and not part of the official rules. I used to play Chess a lot, back when I was in elementary school, and up through College, and a little bit beyond. I actually enjoyed playing against people who were somewhat better than me. I didn't mind losing, if I felt like I could at least hold my own for a while. But I went to school with some really excellent chess players -- nearly all of my friends in College played in tournaments. We even had a legendary tournament against MIT (I was at Caltech, and MIT was our 'arch-nemesis' lol). One thing though that I discovered I liked better was chess variants. I had a book filled with different variants back in college. My absolute favorite variant (well actually, a family of variants) was team chess (aka Siamese Chess, aka Bughouse). I loved it because all of my friends years of study of the game were for nought and it was straight head vs. head. And simply being tricky and highly aggressive could beat out their expert chess theory. I had one friend in Jr. High school and High school who was the top New York State chess player under age 18, who really tried to encourage me to play in tournaments, and so on. But I realized that if I wanted to be competitive, I'd have to really work at it, and I did not want to turn a fun hobby into work.

Such an interesting review. I laughed when I saw the title and being a bit of a chess player, I had to listen to what was said. Well done!! A look at one of the great games of all time but from a POV outside the "chess world". Made me think, how would I "review" a new game called Chess if it had never existed. Not going to detail it but I think I would give it a 6.5. I grew up playing a lot of chess, #1 game for me. Got good enough to get a "lucky" win against a top 20 player in the world (while he was distracted with 49 other opponents) but eventually quit playing for 8 years because the fun had gone out of the game. Now that I have found other heavy board games, I might never play chess again. But I would leap at a chance to teach people Shatranj, a forerunner of Chess. Comparing either Chess or Shatranj to other abstract games, it wows simply because there are so many different types of pieces. Some games have more but most only have one or two. But a well designed modern board game has far more intricacy woven into it. Chess is probably still my favorite abstract game but the love I feel for it is more because of it's history.

Endless strategic possibilities, easy to understand, language-independent, accommodates different levels of players with basic handicap solutions such as removing a piece. Standard tournament set for $50-60 has top-notch components one can't find even in the most deluxe kickstarter editions of modern board games: wooden board (with grid made from two different types of wood; not merely painted!) and beautifully handcrafted pieces that follow a centuries-old tradition. Easy to find opponents - virtually every small town has several chess clubs, not to mention online play. Sure, by modern abstract combinatorial game standards it has a few inelegant solutions, but it is still more elegant than 99% of modern designs. Centuries of literature if you're into deep study. And it's a surprisingly thematic abstract! It's a war game and even a total beginner can immediately feel into the confrontational theme of Chess and start to test out his ideas based on spatial intuition. If Shogi didn't exist, Chess would get a 10 from me.

The nature of Chess is different than most modern games. The human species has a base nature where they enjoy dominating over an adversary. Think of what was considered sport in the earliest times...wrestling. Maybe as societies evolved, boxing, fencing...early games and sports revolved around besting an opponent one vs. one. I think the reason Chess has stood the test of time is that it is basically an abstraction of that. It's a 1 vs. 1 wrestling match. It's an opportunity for a person to stake out their superiority on the battlefield. It's hand to hand, or head to head combat. To win at Chess is an accomplishment of skill. To be good at it takes dedication and experience and I'm sure, some innate capability for a certain kind of complex thinking. In most cases, winning at Chess means you are better than you opponent. You are measuring yourself against them maybe more than the game. You can strive to improve and gain superiority with perseverance and commitment. All of this is why I don't like and don't play Chess. I appreciate those that can, but that's not me. I can't ever see playing Chess and having fun any more than I would enjoy boxing against a pro. I don't have the time or inclination to do what it would take to have competitive games against good players. I'm just not that good. I do play games where I can get better, and have a better chance at winning, but it's an order of magnitude different than Chess. No other game would require such a particular vetting of the competition to determine whether we would play a competitive game. I don't like a game where I will ALWAYS lose to the better player. To really do it right, you'd have to get into a club or team or competitions or some way that you are constantly measured and rated and that's just not for me. I think it's neat for people that like it and I do have an appreciation for what it takes. But I'll stay on the sidelines.

This is hands-down one of my favorite videos I've seen from you guys. I love how thoughtful you all were about chess. I also love that you chose to view this through the lens that you look at other games with. Honestly, I thought this was going to be a joke video when I first saw it, but instead it was well-reasoned and almost nostalgic.

nice, now I want to see a review of Go!

I still appreciate how there is some theme to the pieces and that it’s a game my dad and his brothers played in the Philippines and my friend’s dad played in Peru and then we go head to head and play it in America. Then little kids are still learning it at school and it’s an intergenerational world wide game. I still feel the anguish of losing my pieces and terror when the queen is hunting me down. Still a classic!

I love this, and I think you did a great job of tackling this like just another review. Mildly surprised by the large amount of enthusiasm you guys brought to the review, keep it up!!! good good stuff.

Referring to CCGs and reading up on what decks to use... I have a HUGE distaste for that. I never like netdecking... maybe that also comes from playing Magic before there was such a thing... I started playing in 1994. I have always homebrewed my own decks, and, thankfully, most of my friends do the same. I do have a couple friends who do obviously just netdeck whatever is good, so it is extra satisfying to crush them with my homebrew decks. heh You'll never see me netdeck ever... brewing up and designing a deck is half the fun. Making a good deck (on your own) in Magic makes you feel like a tiny bit of a game designer, in a way. ;-)

They should invite a Chess historian on the show. Would be interesting to learn from either game theory or game history from experts.

I too would get rid of en passant since it seems like just making the move that leads to en passant illegal would better solve that problem (especially since a lot of new people to chess have trouble wrapping their minds around that rule). I would not however get rid of castling... it is a good defensive move and fairly simple concept to wrap your head a round. As to what you said about announcing you are about to win, there is something quite satisfying when you say "Check!" I played a lot of chess as a child and teenager, but not much as an adult. I did just break out chess the other day after making my Favorite Game Friday video to teach my kids. The big problem I found though is I couldn't figure out the balance of helping them learn to strategize and not outplay them too much. In many games today, I can feel comfortable playing full force with my kids and they still stand a chance and won't get destroyed, plus they can have fun even if I win by a large margin. Figuring out how to hold back so they can feel like they are doing well is very difficult in chess.

Novadays it is very easy to find someone who plays chess at your level. Just install the lichess app, and it will find you opponents of your level after a few games. I love chess, it is hard to compare it to modern board games, but it is 10/10 for me.

Oh, i did not know about the "mid-move pawn capture" when the pawn moves its first 2 steps.

I think the part about declaring Check and Check Mate is to simulate feudal warfare. in many battles and wars you win by convincing your opponent that they have lost so they declare defeat. Rarely the leader of the opponents are killed in the war. At least in the noble idea of feudal warfare.

Roy rocking that Konoha hoodie. So who won in a game between Tom and Zee?

I'd be curious to know if folks feel chess has a larger decision space versus other modern games.

12:35 I'm with Chris about not wanting to read up strategy guides to get better at a game - but what about just practicing and studying alone to get better? We can playing SSB against the computer, or think/modify our CCG decks "to get better", and have fun while doing that. I think many people have fun with chess in that way as well - just playing PvE against a computer, or playing against oneself trying things out to see what works and what doesn't.

April 1st came early this year

I play chess everyday. I coach it. I teach it. It’s one of the few games that has a depth that truly rewards digging in and engaging with it. It’s lack of randomness, it’s perfect knowledge, means you have total agency over the outcome. You don’t lose because you got a bad card draw. You don’t win because you rolled a better dice roll. You won because you outplayed your opponent. There’s no hand-holding or catch-up mechanism. And, the more you play, the better you get.

I grew up playing chess in school with my teachers, classmates, with my father at home. Later on played tons of it with my best friend at a pub drinking a bottle of wine and had fun. Lots of good memories. It is an ancient game, has changed through the time, got pupularity, smart people played. Rather simple rules but soooo deep strategy inside. And... it's opensource :) so you do not have to pay for licence if you want to publish a new chess set. Nowadays it is not so easy to find someone who wants to play chess. Most boardgamers do not like it. Maybe because it is an open game (no hidden pieces), and very hard to master, no luck factor, no fancy miniatures, no resource management, but pure, painful battle like in most wargames. I love it!

Chess also has the variant of "speed chess". It is quite good if you are looking for something different. Same rules you just have to make the move immediately.

For those who want to compete without randomness being a factor, chess is amazing. Since it is a skill based game, anyone who appreciates deep strategy would enjoy the design space it has. As mentioned, the biggest issues are that skill based games fall apart in the fun department when there is a gap between players. That goes for real time fighting video games or sports, etc. That would be a hurdle that I'd jump if the mechanical actions you do in Chess were fun. I don't enjoy trading pieces or trying to setup elaborate positional traps with pieces with an abstracted battle theme. A game with thematic or IP based artwork would be more fun for me to compete in and I'd forgive it some of the randomness that dice rolling and card draw can introduce. Am I wrong in thinking that, once you remove the physicality or real time pressure for quick thinking, you end up with a game where the skill that is required is basically more study/experience? Do abstracts like chess just capture experience as a skill? Do games where randomness provide an arena for players to test their mettle in other was like flexibility in thinking and is that more interesting/better/worse?

This channel has become so 'cult of the new' . I can't financially keep up with this. I looked up Chess on our local auction site and they were going for hundreds of dollars. There was some cheap knockoffs, but I don't want to support fake printings. Have to protect the industry.

Sometimes you want a game you can sink hundreds of hours into and dig deep into the strategy and tactics. Chess is fantastic because I can go and practice/study for days and there are plenty of players as good or much better. If I optimize my Splendor game everyone rolls there eyes and no one wants to play. Chess really requires the hours and effort to get to an intermediate level for the game to open up strategically. Like golf, it's only really fun if you take it moderately seriously to not be terrible (why I never golf).

about time youve reviewed it, the hype died off in 600 AD

Since a couple of the "squares" gave it a low rating, basically because it was an abstract-strategy game, it would have been good to hear how they thought it compared to others of the genre.

When you get a real nice chess set, they make for a beautiful table presence. My son has a great looking Transformers chess set and I taught him side by side with a real looking chess set. I have collected a few nice ones over the years. We still pull out chess once in a while to play. I am not good, but know the rules. My son, learned when he was six, now 23, he is much better than me…

When I saw the thumbnail I thougth: “Wait, isnt 04/01 yet!”

I love the middle game in chess. I don't like the openings because the person that studied the most has a clear advantage there. The endings are interesting. I think chess is a great game. I am very sad that the board gaming community in general don't like abstracts. For me abstracts are the best

I had no idea that you could upgrade a pawn to any piece if it makes it to the other side or that if you repeat a move three times the game is over. When I was a kid, we just figured it out on our own and played our own variant based on how we understood the rules. I wonder if there are others who’ve played incorrectly based on how they learned it when they were younger?

I know Zee likes poker, hope to see that! This was a fun video. The check situation reminds me of what I hated about the first summoner wars… that end game. So glad they fixed it in the second edition.

I'd love a video on Go, the way SU&SD have done.

I just ordered a smart Chess board so I can play with my brother who lives on the opposite coast as me. I can’t wait, Chess can be good fun if you have someone to square off against who is at a similar skill level as you (which for me is probably below average lol).

I've never seen Roy look as angry as he did in this video lol

This game only became popular because of the miniatures in it!!

In Tak you are also supposed to announce if you have an opportunity to win on the next move.

I wonder if we'll see any chess sets sold with the dt seal of approval on it😀

Oh god i love games like chess, shogi, especially go!!! Thnx for the review! You guys are great! I dont mind playing with stronger players than me cause that way i can learn from them! In fact i enjoy playing against someone stronger than me! For me these games are like top of the top! I love them! 😁 Let me share a quote, as coming from a great professor. "The goal in chess, is simply not to lose", meaning that you do not have to necessarily win. There is also draw 😊 I am tempted to through in a few suggestions for games for you guys, but i am pretty sure that you have them 😂 I would like to hear your thoughts on Go/Weiqi! It has a.......how to put it correctly.....?.....a complex simplicity.....or a deep simplicity.....which i love 😊 See you next time!

Wow this was a very interesting video. It's hard to talk about chess in a way that hasn't been done before, the four voices and brains articulating points is a great format. And i felt this chess review benefitted from that in a perfect way.

If you haven't played the app "Really Bad Chess," by Zach Gage, it's great for just playing chess for the love of the game rather than an act of study. It randomizes you and the computer opponent's piece setup (so someone can have a front row of all bishops,) and it's a delightful puzzle.

This is a pleasant surprise. Please do this round table format for another classic game like go, or backgammon.

While the $150 KS games that many content creators push on social media get bought and maybe played for two weeks before the next greatest game comes out and is played and forgotten about two weeks later people will still be playing chess. 200 years from now when most of the games reviewed on this channel and other channels will be forgotten about people will still play chess.

I enjoyed hearing everyone’s opinion on Chess and their connotations of the game. I’ve never really knew how to play Chess until I picked up No Stress Chess for my kids. We really like playing that version and my 9 year old now wants to try “real” chess on her own.

I wonder how many other people skipped the "How it's played" segment of the video.

it's difficult to compare chess to board games... its success is actually because it has no luck involved (as many abstract games) but it also has enough complexity to allow for limitless competition, i.e. it cannot be solved. Many abstracts that have existed in history can at some point be solved, i.e. a strategy emerges that warrants a substantial percentage of wins. Chess is complex enough that its "meta" has never been solved, and that's why there is a proliferation of books and rankings and so on. It is a great streamlined abstract game design that has not too much complexity and can be learned easily, but enough complexity to remain fresh. This is not to say that there are not other abstract games with the same characteristics - Onitama for example might be one - but the cultural success of chess means that not every similar game gets a chance to become a classic

April 1st already? Wonder if they will look at the '960' expansion, too. Has a lot of new maps!

We just need a cooperative expansion now

Thank you for saying "check" at the end of the video lol

Oh god, that segment about "you cannot trick your opponent into losing, you cannot do misdirection because you need to call check" was painful to watch. Haven't you guys heard about those recent trends of Oh no my Queen!? Baiting a misplay is a such a big part of this game... I guess though that those gotcha moments are harder to find, but also, chess does not exist in a bubble: my favourite way to play is to solve puzzles. Black wins in three, figure it out. Those are two things I feel like you guys should've talked about.

It's true that playing with someone WAY stronger than you can be frustrating. But this is true of any game where luck is not a major factor. For example, my best friend was, when we were teenagers, a very strong chess player; I managed to beat him maybe 10% of the time. Well guess what? When we play modern games with low luck and high strategic factor, he still crushes me. For example, I love Scythe. My friend has massacred me every single time we've played, to thee point where we're not playing anymore. Not because I'm a sore loser; I'm really not, and I'd still play. But my friend feels so bad crushing me he just isn't having any fun.

This was a great game for the 64 Squares format

You certainly don't have to say "check". Many probably do in non-tournament games. I started playing chess when I was about 10, and played at our local club for many years. I studies lots of opening theory back in the days (I've forgotten most by now of course). The most boring part of tournament chess is that lots of games end in a draw. So now I prefer to play Shogi, where games (usually) don't end in a draw (if they do you have to play again with remaining time on the clock). Chess is a fantastic game with a rich history. But if it came out today, I'm not sure that I would be impressed.

I agree with these reviews, I love teaching my kids chess, they don’t get it totally yet but I have a lot of memories through school of finally beating that teacher or sometimes beating my older brother. I truly depends who you are playing with, it’s hard to describe how you can think on a whole other level when playing a game.

I'll hold out for the Kickstarter collector's edition with pre-printed minis.

"I play chess." -"Oh, you must be smart" "I didn't say I played it well."

What's the Chess equivalent of Jumping the Shark? Knight jumping the Pawn?

One of the most surprising Dice Tower videos I've ever seen! And while I enjoyed it, please don't do the same with Monopoly 🙃

The old (1967) 3M game "Feudal" turns Chess into a 6 player game :)

love the minis in this game

The meta of Chess - or any game for that matter - only matters if the players involved are aware of it. Chess - much like Go - is crunchy, engaging on the micro and macro level, meaningfully interactive, opaque, and it does not hold your hand in the slightest. It is equal parts punishing and rewarding, but you only have yourself to blame for both bad play and good. Chess is a 10/10. Whether or not you find it a 10/10 really comes down to your tastes and how much you are willing to put into it.

A good game, but I'm probably never going to learn the opening theory. Fischer Random Chess is an interesting variant.

I've never learned to play Chess. There's so many different rules for the movement of the different pieces and I have such a bad memory. Plus the way they depict Chess in movies as Roy said it gives the impression that you have to be a genius to play. But just recently I was thinking about learning since a Jim Henson's Labyrinth edition is coming out. So I'm glad to see this video and even have a quick how to play segment. I was with Tom until the exceptions to the movements, now I'm overwhelmed again. I guess I'll learn to play it eventually but I think I'm still going to be more of a Checkers and Cribbage person.

They should totally do a KS edition with massive minis

The rule for en passant was introduced, because otherwise you would not be able to catch that pawn and 2-step-pawn move would be OP ;)

It’s awesome you guys are finally doing this as a series.

The best discussion about a game yet. Hit ALL the right points, positive/neutral/negative. Each person nailed their argument. Well done. Great video.

I had to check the calendar to see if today was the beginning of April 😅

You’re misconstruing the “check” thing. Firstly, You don’t actually have to go through check to get to checkmate. If you don’t want them to know your sneaky plan, just don’t put them in check and often you can just go directly to checkmate. Often I only use check to fork them or win a tempo. Also you don’t actually have to tell them you’ve put them in check, it’s more that you would tell someone if they didn’t realise it or move out of the check, cos that’s an illegal move. At higher levels, I’ve never heard anyone say it cos they know it won’t be missed, but at lower levels sometimes it’s missed with revealed checks.

New variant of chess: pinkies up and snooty French taunting, “your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries”.

Yes! Chess is getting a (great) review by a great group of gamers. Along with Go, I view and respect Chess as being the OGs of area control (Go) & tactical skirmish (Chess). Such fun games.

Chess is a great game - when you are learning , raging white attacks - having fun - I never want to study it to decimate people - or concentrate on fine nuances ( I understand some people love this part ) - understanding positional play , protecting pieces, traps, sacrifices is great - normally I play with some fun . At school long ago when it was a grudge match I would grind it out - get an advantage then piece for piece or super defensive - castle , good pawn piece structure - attack a key mid-space - most of us amateurs overreach - I think the adventure , discovery part is great - that's why I don't want to study - Plus if you get real good that just leaves chess -heads to play . Haven't played in ages - but was partner limited in casual play - saying that like most games need regular play to see board development - so maybe not as good at the moment :)- same as 52 card trick taking games - when you play a lot - you just know what cards haven't been played/seen

It is called the end game, Chris. Yet another chess concept that has made its way into our broader culture.

Overall I'd rate chess a 7 as well. My favorite way to play chess is asynchronously at home or at work. I'd rate it an 8 this way. Really want to play nightmare chess with that deck of cards..

Wow! How about a 4 Squares Review of Monopoly? ;)

Three other ways for a draw - 50 moves without a piece capture, mutual agreement, insufficient material.