Frustrating draws at the top level - kills interest

I watch a lot of chess tournaments. The desire to win and crush the opponent is missing in the top players, in my opinion. It kills the interest of many chess enthusiasts like me.

Those who win games, should be awarded more. I propose the following rules in the FIDE tournaments:
1. DRAW, award 0 points to both players.
2. WIN, award 1 point to the winner, 0 points to the loser.
3. If the first place scored 0 points, no trophies or cash prices.

This should reduce the draws significantly. Because:
1. In a draw position, people can take risk, because a draw and a loss both have same points (0 points).
2. People who want trophy / cash, would want to win at least once. And the only way to come 1st in a tournament is to win more games!

i agree friend, i was disappointed with the world championship, even though they are amazing players, when you can force a draw its just very boring for the fans

i think the points should be like football/soccer

3 points for a win
1 point each for a draw
0 for a loss

you can't punish people for a drawn game, when the game itself is very drawish, but you should reward wins more

TheKingClash, not necessarily. There are situations (attempt to win) when a loss is more respectable than a hold.

Either ways, main point is chess should not be about giving fair treatment to draws or losses. Chess should be about the victories.

chessTho, yes many people / friends are disappointed. Top players look satisfied and happy. I don't see a burning desire in them.

They make baby faces and blame it on the position. But most of the times, it is not the fault of the position. Here are some facts that support this claim:
1. Ask them to play the same position against a very strong engine and then we will see. Most of the times, they will lose.
2. We have seen Magnus destroying opponents in a completely drawn position. If he can do it, why can't others at least try!

So it is not a fault of the position or the game of chess. They are not that much better than the opponent. Moreover, they look happy after a draw, which is more annoying.

0 points is not a punishment. Just an encouragement for players who try to win from a drawn position (draw and loss give same 0 point).

"If he can do it, why can't others at least try!"

Every GM tries? You just seem to be blind to it because they don't score with that methode as often as Magnus.

What exactly would your system change?
The player with the most wins does win the tournament in 90% of cases. Especially at super GM level.

See I am not the biggest fan of the current state of things either, but the suggested system does more harm than good.

@himav said in #1:
> I watch a lot of chess tournaments. The desire to win and crush the opponent is missing in the top players, in my opinion. It kills the interest of many chess enthusiasts like me.
>
>

What’s wrong with a hard fought draw? Why does someone need to lose for it to be entertaining? I’ve seen lots of games with rich and interesting positions that have played out to a draw, but were very exciting along the way. I think you’ll find that the stronger a player is, the more they will be able to appreciate this sort of thing, rather than just looking for a blood bath. You can have a great game of chess without a decisive result.

@chessTho said in #3:
> i agree friend, i was disappointed with the world championship, even though they are amazing players, when you can force a draw its just very boring for the fans
>
> i think the points should be like football/soccer
>
> 3 points for a win
> 1 point each for a draw
> 0 for a loss
>
> you can't punish people for a drawn game, when the game itself is very drawish, but you should reward wins more

This is probably the best option. It doesnt punish draws and allows both players to settle on equal terms while getting something for their efforts and for one player it may be a point gained and the other it may feel like 2 points lost..
3 points for a win is more than enough encouragment. It may also even keep leaders on their toes if they feel they can force an early draw in a final round because they are 1.5 points ahead..

Its a simple, tried and tested system which was specifically adopted to bring about less draws. No need to reinvent the wheel here.

Everyone likes a hardfought game where someone comes out on top. However, draws are also interesting if they are the natural outcome of a game where both sides had their chances but couldn't convert. On the other hand, games that go a few moves into well known draw territory or a quick repeat sequence just so both sides can cash a point are not attractive. Maybe a draw with less than a certain number of moves should get less points. For example, one that ends before the 1st time control (to discourage long 'prearranged draw' sequences.

@jesgluckner said in #6:
> Every GM tries? You just seem to be blind to it because they don't score with that methode as often as Magnus.
Watch Karjakin vs Carlsen in Tata Steel 2022. Do you consider that as a try ?

> What exactly would your system change?
> The player with the most wins does win the tournament in 90% of cases. Especially at super GM level.
How many seconds did you think about my system ?

> See I am not the biggest fan of the current state of things either, but the suggested system does more harm than good.
At least we agree that something needs to change.