Chess Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for serious players and enthusiasts of chess. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I want to play chess with my wife, but we have different ranks (I am approximately 1900, and she is ~1500 (probably less based on comments)). Normally, our games are boring for me.
I tried to balance the game by playing without the queen, but I still win the game. I am looking for some tactics to balance the game based on ranking difference?
In addition to other suggestions, you could consider a chess variant that may even the playing field.
Chess960 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960) [previously called Fischer Random, but renamed to avoid potential conflict/discussion over Bobby Fischer who invented it], for example is a variant that randomizes the positioning of the back-rank pieces. Unlike other randomization variants, this one strongly attempts to keep everything else about the game the same. The rules of piece placement are:
-The two sides are mirrored, as in regular chess.
-The king must be between the two rooks [this allows for castleing, which involves moving the king to the 'traditional' kingside or queenside castleing positions].
-The two bishops must be on opposite colours.
This leaves 960 possible positions, which can be chosen at random through various means (check the wikepedia page for details).
The benefit of chess960 in this case, is that it eliminates some of the advantage inherent in opening position theory.
By the midgame, a typical Chess960 game looks like a regular chess game (except perhaps for some oddly placed pieces here or there). Ultimately it opens up like a regular chess game, but you can't memorize any opening lines. For a 1500-1900 match-up, opening theory likely makes a significant edge between the two of you. Of course, there is some small learning curve to starting to play chess960, but as you are both learning it for the first time, you will both have that curve together. Of course, a skill difference would still exist, so even with Chess960 it may be required to still give your wife a rook/ minor piece for the full handicap.
A particular copyrighted variant that creates an even greater randomization aspect, is "Knightmare Chess" http://www.sjgames.com/knightmare/. This game introduces cards with various impacts on the game ("This turn your pawn can move twice, etc."). The random element decreases the net impact of a skill differential somewhat, as luck plays a fairly large element.
(Disclaimer: this is my first post on this network, and in all honesty both you and your wife could probably beat me at a game. But I do have years of experience of finding handicaps to make chess games more even and enjoyable.)
For several years I organized an odds-giving tournament for my club during the summer months with a sliding scale from pawn-and-move to queen based on rating difference. For good measure we added a time handicap as well. I do think that if you can beat your wife at Queen odds then the difference in your ratings must be much more than you say.
Equalizing the chances under those conditions, in a way that is fun for both of you, calls for extreme measures. Have you tried giving her the right to retract her move a certain number of times in each game?
I don't believe chess really lends itself to such handicapping. She could have a time advantage but it probably wouldn't help since beginners lack ability, not time. More time spent analyzing inefficiently will not substantively help.
I would recommend you switch games, frankly. Shogi, a cousin of chess has a tried-and-true handicapping system. It's a great game, too.
Pieces in Shogi are weaker on the whole, somewhat more numerous, and never really leave the game - they switch sides. Thus a handicap of a piece in Shogi is less severe than a similar handicap in chess, and with more pieces, there is more freedom in the handicapping.
As you can see in these links, this isn't ad hoc. They're serious about both players having a challenging game.
A solution I have employed with my girlfriend, who is interested in improving at chess, is to begin with the endgame.
Setting up a winning late-game position such as a rook, bishop and three pawns vs a knight and two pawns provides a learning experience for the weaker player on how to leverage existing advantages and close out the game. More pieces can gradually be introduced to dilute the impact of the advantage.
For the stronger player, the goal is surviving as long as possible or attempting to get to a drawn position.
You can try switching sides every 5 moves or so - a good workout for you too: to try and improve a poor position.
The way I have always done this is with time.
Start with 5 minutes each on the clocks, no increments. Then the winner gets one minute less and loser one minute more for each subsequent game until equilibrium is reached (players start to alternate wins). If it gets down to 9 v 1 and 9 still wins then the loser gets 9 min 30 seconds and the winner 30 seconds. I've never had it go beyond that.
EDIT: I just got back from the Isle of Man prize giving and after tournament party. IM Lawrence Trent (~2400) was playing blitz / bullet with Caruana with 3 minutes to Caruana's 1 minute and losing in a proportion of about 2 to 1. He then took on Nakamura with 5 minutes to Nakamura's 45 seconds with similar results. So, this is the normal way of handicapping even at the highest levels.
Chess doesn't seem to handicap as well as other games. This is why my wife and I don't play chess together (even though we both play chess). We play other games instead, where we are much more even (my greater rating in chess comes from years of being coached, not so much from natural ability).
If your wife is interested in learning, you can give her problems from a book, or play through endings (at her level, not yours), but both of these tend to leave the thinking on her end, while you are waiting patiently. I currently just put a problem up on the demo board in our house for my wife and kids to solve, and field questions about it, and play online if I want a game.
Let your wife make two moves for every move you get to make. The big rule is that the weaker player can't move the same piece more than once in one turn. It's extremely frustrating for the higher ranked player, but it is playable and you can still win the game so over all it is a lot more balanced. It also gets the weaker player to plan more, but weaker players do seem to get more sloppy with this rule set. It's an interesting way to even out the playing field, but it's probably not the best way for a new player to improve. Essentially this method is a way for a far weaker player to be able to give a more experienced player a hard game. You can also tweak these rules if you want; I'm not your bossperson do whatever you want. Just make sure that the stronger player isn't having too easy of a time. The stronger person is supposed to have it hard here.
You might want to check out chess 2 as well. it's chess, but with different special rules based on what team/country/base choose, and an easier win condition. The tactics are all different so it's a lot harder for a more experienced player to play.
It's as chess as chess960 is. No, chess960 just sets a particular position without changing the rules any further. With your rule, the mechanics would be entirely different. Just think about a knight fork where your opponent has the chance to move both pieces to safety since they can move twice. This way, they might never learn about the danger that a knight fork actually poses.