Vassily Ivanchuk plays both and he says both are very difficult but checkers is much more due to the amount of captures. Chess one piece is captured at a time. Whereas in checkers there are multiple captures. American Straight Checkers is a more limited game and is the only variant of checkers that is solved. So my advice is to play variants where there is unpromoted checkers that can capture backwards or side to side. Along with the flying Kings. This is where checkers in my opinion out shines chess. Stalemates are a win in checkers while in chess they are a draw. I love playing both and both are good for the brain. Don't underestimate the complexities of checkers and think that it's a simple child's game.
I would like to give a counterexample of an historical chess player named Rashid Nezhmetdinov who was both an international master in chess (though he played at grandmaster level with tactical play rivaling the great Mikhail Tal) and was a checkers master in the Soviet union. When he came to the decision to leave behind one of the games to focus on the other, he supposedly said something along the lines of "all of checkers can be reduced to all rook chess endgames". 15 years after he gave up checkers professionally, he was a spectator for the semifinals checkers tournament in the USSR. One of the checkers players participating in the tournament wasn't able to show up so Rashid Nezhmetdinov volunteered to fill the players spot. He then proceeded to win all his games in the semifinals tournament, advanced to the finals tournament which he also won, and placed 2nd in the USSR checkers championship. I think this is likely because Rashid Nezhmetdinov was a gifted tactical player which helped him be both a great chess player (though not a very well rounded one) and an amazing checkers player. Personally I would say that both games are equally difficult because the difficulty of each game is reliant on the abilities of your opponent but I find chess to be more complicated and therefore, on average more difficult since you can't improve by only studying tactics and calculations, you need to be well versed in opening, middlegame (positional/strategic & tactical/calculation), and the endgame which Rashid Nezhmetdinov mentioned being in it's entirety more complicated than all of checkers. Perhaps what Vasily Ivanchuk meant was that checkers was more difficult tactically than chess, but not overall.
For me, playing against Filipinos who play more checkers than chess, it feels like a magic trick then they trap you. "How did you do that," I would ask them and they would say something like "I just saw it," or "I saw a good shape". It is very interesting but it was hard to get my brain around it.
Yes, that is true! But the "decision space" matters as well. Technically, you're playing against the other player when playing Tic-Tac-Toe, but the decision space is quite limited in that case (although you could say that you are dependent upon the other player making a mistake, so I still see your point!)
Thank you for this. I am a checkers master myself. Have been playing it for 21 years now. The game is very underestimated indeed. I have always found the "X is playing chess and Y is playing checkers" phrase very demeaning. Checkers is not Tic Tac Toe.
There's 3. English checkers is the most popular one. Brazilian checkers is most popular in Europe. International checkers is the main version of checkers in tournaments as it is the most complex being played on a 10X10 grid and I think might be the first version of checkers
Can people draw against perfect play AI at checkers? If so, I’d say that checkers is indeed an “easier” game than chess, since the strongest chess computers are basically unbeatable.
Forgot my ignorance but do draughts players read books and study to learn tactics, stratigies, and Endgames like chess players do? And I'm not referring to the highest levels, i mean like ordinary club players? Honestly curious.
Played hundreds of games of Draughts with my Grandad growing up, played Chess with my dad, just cannot be convinced that Draughts is a harder game, absolutely no comparison for me.
For me, I think chess is still harder because there are more pieces and attack patterns to master due to having 6 different pieces that each move and attack differently (kings, queens, rooks, knights, bishops, and pawns), while checks has only 2 movements types (regular pieces and kings) but both can only move diagonally, meaning you are only using half of the board in checkers. That's based on the rules and what I see face value visually outside chats, data, etc. Someone might be able to say something different if they played it much longer than me and play both games heavily (wonder if there is a person who plays both checkers and chess regularly and is a grand master in both games that could share his thoughts on the topic), but since I can't think of no such grand master right now, this discussion can have 100 people talk in a room on the topic, each give a different opinion, and still not come up with a good answer whatsoever after maybe a month. It can also lead to 100+ books written on the topic by the same people that could fill a bookshelf at a bookstore, and still leave everyone wondering what the answer to the question each. Otherwise, this is one of those unanswered questions where you can get a different opinion from each person and don't know which answer is right at the end of the day.
Many of the people who are denigrating checkers have never played it seriously, and some aren't even playing with the correct rules (i.e. mandatory capture).
Checkers is far deeper than chess, I whipped numerous chess players in checkers, who thought it would be easy to beat me. So many chess players have admitted to me that checkers is harder, and that is the reason why they chose chess. lol.
In chess u can lose 4 of your pieces and still be able to play and win but in cheakers if you behind by 4 of your pieces you have definitely lost the game
I applaud the attempt, and the arguments you make... I don't deny checkers at the highest levels also involves deep strategy and forward thinking and planning... but, and I suppose there is some wiggle room in how "harder" is defined, I would argue chess is the "harder" game for these reasons... 1) chess has 6 distinct pieces, and all move and capture in different ways, whereas checkers has 1 (or 2 if you count the king)... mastering the interplay of these six different pieces is harder than dealing with one 2) this is quite related to the first, but since in chess pieces can capture from farther away (and from all the way across the board with some pieces), I would argue it is harder to keep track of potential threats in chess... things that play into this are threats like discovered check 3) chess has a larger number of possible board positions as the game goes on (and I don't think it is close)... trying to see each possible position several moves ahead, taking into account the unique pieces in chess, is "harder" just from a numerical perspective
The same can be said for checkers, even the incomparable Marion Tinsley lost. Ryan,Gotnosky, Richard Jordan, Willie Wylie and so many other legendary players have lost over and over again, no human player has mastered the game, and it precedes chess by thousands of years.
Vassily Ivanchuk plays both and he says both are very difficult but checkers is much more due to the amount of captures. Chess one piece is captured at a time. Whereas in checkers there are multiple captures. American Straight Checkers is a more limited game and is the only variant of checkers that is solved. So my advice is to play variants where there is unpromoted checkers that can capture backwards or side to side. Along with the flying Kings. This is where checkers in my opinion out shines chess. Stalemates are a win in checkers while in chess they are a draw. I love playing both and both are good for the brain. Don't underestimate the complexities of checkers and think that it's a simple child's game.
Thanks for all these great ideas. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.
I would like to give a counterexample of an historical chess player named Rashid Nezhmetdinov who was both an international master in chess (though he played at grandmaster level with tactical play rivaling the great Mikhail Tal) and was a checkers master in the Soviet union. When he came to the decision to leave behind one of the games to focus on the other, he supposedly said something along the lines of "all of checkers can be reduced to all rook chess endgames". 15 years after he gave up checkers professionally, he was a spectator for the semifinals checkers tournament in the USSR. One of the checkers players participating in the tournament wasn't able to show up so Rashid Nezhmetdinov volunteered to fill the players spot. He then proceeded to win all his games in the semifinals tournament, advanced to the finals tournament which he also won, and placed 2nd in the USSR checkers championship. I think this is likely because Rashid Nezhmetdinov was a gifted tactical player which helped him be both a great chess player (though not a very well rounded one) and an amazing checkers player. Personally I would say that both games are equally difficult because the difficulty of each game is reliant on the abilities of your opponent but I find chess to be more complicated and therefore, on average more difficult since you can't improve by only studying tactics and calculations, you need to be well versed in opening, middlegame (positional/strategic & tactical/calculation), and the endgame which Rashid Nezhmetdinov mentioned being in it's entirety more complicated than all of checkers. Perhaps what Vasily Ivanchuk meant was that checkers was more difficult tactically than chess, but not overall.
Finally checkers i getting justice.
Oh yeah
For me, playing against Filipinos who play more checkers than chess, it feels like a magic trick then they trap you. "How did you do that," I would ask them and they would say something like "I just saw it," or "I saw a good shape". It is very interesting but it was hard to get my brain around it.
So true
Trick question! The answer is, Diplomacy!
Lol. Good call. You'll never master it. The minute you think you have is the minute you get stabbed.
The main thing: You aren't playing against the game. You are playing against the other player.
Yes, that is true! But the "decision space" matters as well. Technically, you're playing against the other player when playing Tic-Tac-Toe, but the decision space is quite limited in that case (although you could say that you are dependent upon the other player making a mistake, so I still see your point!)
Thank you for this. I am a checkers master myself. Have been playing it for 21 years now. The game is very underestimated indeed. I have always found the "X is playing chess and Y is playing checkers" phrase very demeaning. Checkers is not Tic Tac Toe.
There are too many variants of Checkers for it to become a World game. in chess there's only one set of rules
There's 3.
English checkers is the most popular one.
Brazilian checkers is most popular in Europe.
International checkers is the main version of checkers in tournaments as it is the most complex being played on a 10X10 grid and I think might be the first version of checkers
Not been convinced but interesting discussion. Chess>checkers, but i probably like checkers best
I'm not entirely sure that I've convinced myself either. I do prefer chess though.
Can people draw against perfect play AI at checkers? If so, I’d say that checkers is indeed an “easier” game than chess, since the strongest chess computers are basically unbeatable.
Forgot my ignorance but do draughts players read books and study to learn tactics, stratigies, and Endgames like chess players do? And I'm not referring to the highest levels, i mean like ordinary club players? Honestly curious.
Played hundreds of games of Draughts with my Grandad growing up, played Chess with my dad, just cannot be convinced that Draughts is a harder game, absolutely no comparison for me.
I appreciate you weighing in.
For me, I think chess is still harder because there are more pieces and attack patterns to master due to having 6 different pieces that each move and attack differently (kings, queens, rooks, knights, bishops, and pawns), while checks has only 2 movements types (regular pieces and kings) but both can only move diagonally, meaning you are only using half of the board in checkers. That's based on the rules and what I see face value visually outside chats, data, etc.
Someone might be able to say something different if they played it much longer than me and play both games heavily (wonder if there is a person who plays both checkers and chess regularly and is a grand master in both games that could share his thoughts on the topic), but since I can't think of no such grand master right now, this discussion can have 100 people talk in a room on the topic, each give a different opinion, and still not come up with a good answer whatsoever after maybe a month. It can also lead to 100+ books written on the topic by the same people that could fill a bookshelf at a bookstore, and still leave everyone wondering what the answer to the question each.
Otherwise, this is one of those unanswered questions where you can get a different opinion from each person and don't know which answer is right at the end of the day.
You're likely right about that. I feel like there are more people who would argue on behalf of chess in that room.
Many of the people who are denigrating checkers have never played it seriously, and some aren't even playing with the correct rules (i.e. mandatory capture).
Checkers is far deeper than chess, I whipped numerous chess players in checkers, who thought it would be easy to beat me. So many chess players have admitted to me that checkers is harder, and that is the reason why they chose chess. lol.
In chess u can lose 4 of your pieces and still be able to play and win but in cheakers if you behind by 4 of your pieces you have definitely lost the game
Not true
I applaud the attempt, and the arguments you make... I don't deny checkers at the highest levels also involves deep strategy and forward thinking and planning...
but, and I suppose there is some wiggle room in how "harder" is defined, I would argue chess is the "harder" game for these reasons...
1) chess has 6 distinct pieces, and all move and capture in different ways, whereas checkers has 1 (or 2 if you count the king)... mastering the interplay of these six different pieces is harder than dealing with one
2) this is quite related to the first, but since in chess pieces can capture from farther away (and from all the way across the board with some pieces), I would argue it is harder to keep track of potential threats in chess... things that play into this are threats like discovered check
3) chess has a larger number of possible board positions as the game goes on (and I don't think it is close)... trying to see each possible position several moves ahead, taking into account the unique pieces in chess, is "harder" just from a numerical perspective
Lateral thinking seems to be much more necessary in chess.
chess is harder just no human has ever reached the peak
Well said
The same can be said for checkers, even the incomparable Marion Tinsley lost. Ryan,Gotnosky, Richard Jordan, Willie Wylie and so many other legendary players have lost over and over again, no human player has mastered the game, and it precedes chess by thousands of years.
Come on.