Studying why Gardner's Minichess Variant is solved?

Question

I recently came across an interesting article that proves Gardner's Minichess is solved (2013) and the theoretical result is a draw.

Might studying why Minichess is a theoretical draw help me better understand the concepts behind long term strategy in standard chess?

Here is the starting position of Minichess:

Answer 1

This variant is definitely very interesting, and could prove somewhat beneficial in learning standard chess.

However,

• Standard Chess(SC)'s castling operation is not reflected in this variant. Your king is already tucked away.

• This variant does not reflect SC pawn structures. Space is too limited.

• The value of pieces changes. Knights are going to be worth more than in SC, since they can now traverse half the diagonal of the board in two moves.

• No opening knowledge whatsoever will be attained in this variant. Also, common opening motifs from SC (control the center, develop your pieces) will not be used.

• Standard tactics from SC will not be used as much in this variant. Skewers and pins, for example, would be quite rare.

That leaves endgame practice, which could be a little helpful, but there's also endgame puzzles in SC - and actual SC endgames in SC.

Conclusion:

If your goal is to further your understanding of standard chess, you are better off studying standard chess. This variant looks like a lot of fun, but it does not do a good job of teaching typical chess lessons, for reasons outlined above.

Answer 2

In my experience, small variants emphasize tactics and not so much strategy. This is due to:

1. the closer proximity of all the pieces
2. the reduced board-size cramping pieces and exacerbating their deficiencies.

My conclusion is thus that studying small variants does not help with strategy, but can help with tactics.