Has it ever occurred to you that if you play more than one game and alternate colors you both play the same amount of games of going first?
Why does white always move first, isn't this giving white an unfair advantage?
Sort:
Even alternating white and black wouldn't help if you were only playing one game... I think the only truly fair way to handle it would be to have both sides move at the same time.
Going first is not necessarily an advantage.
Dec 18, 2014
0
#5
I actually do better playing black! The idea for white is to attack and the idea is for black to defend. Black can generally get equality if he opens up the board as early as possible by trading off the central pawns and so forth. Nonetheless it is true that white has an advantage and wins slightly more games statistically speaking.
SeanEnglish wrote:
Even alternating white and black wouldn't help if you were only playing one game... I think the only truly fair way to handle it would be to have both sides move at the same time.
I think this would be cool. I mean, you could actually get a simultaneous checkmate if you played it right.
Dec 18, 2014
0
#7
Isn't it the case that in soccer the ball gets tossed in and both players jump straight into the game? One team starting first would not be fair would not be a level playing field. No one should be starting first every time!
Dec 18, 2014
0
#8
White hadn't always been required to move first. That rule wasn't agreed upon until the late 19th century, so in chess-years, it's somewhat recent.
Dec 18, 2014
0
#9
It's only fair, black gets to move first in checkers. 
(Engines have solved checkers, plus proven it's a draw btw).
Dec 18, 2014
0
#10
If two players are sitting at the chessboard, then when it's their next game, it's understood (under a new rule), the last one to play first would have to wait while the other side moves first, regardless of the color. That's what I call fair! You just say "you started first last game so I 'm black and it's my turn to start first now", that would work!
Dec 18, 2014
0
#11
Ellie47 wrote:
Isn't it the case that in soccer the ball gets tossed in and both players jump straight into the game? One team starting first would not be fair would not be a level playing field. No one should be starting first every time!
No, that's not the way a game of soccer starts.
Dec 18, 2014
0
#12
Someone's gotta go first! I think its funny how a computer thinks the game is "0" but when white makes its first move the score goes to something like "0.1." I wonder if chess is ever solved if we can answer whether white has the advantage or not
Babytigrrr wrote:
Ellie47 wrote:
Isn't it the case that in soccer the ball gets tossed in and both players jump straight into the game? One team starting first would not be fair would not be a level playing field. No one should be starting first every time!
No, that's not the way a game of soccer starts.
Haha. For your information, Ellie47, soccer starts with one random team kicking off with the ball in the first half, then in the next half the other team kicks off with the ball. So its quite equal.
True, one player will have an advantage regardless of who goes first, assuming that going first is an advantage (which generally it is). You can only "even things out" if you play more than one game so that each player gets an equal amount of whites and blacks. But don't worry, the advantage of the first move rarely makes much of a difference at most levels :)
batgirl wrote:
White hadn't always been required to move first. That rule wasn't agreed upon until the late 19th century, so in chess-years, it's somewhat recent.
So then were there games in the 1850s in which black went first? I've never seen an old game presented like that. Or when the games are put in the database do we change any games where black started into "white goes first" form if you will?
Dec 18, 2014
0
#16
I don't really know much about ball games, but I do have a strong sense of fair play. Why was the rule changed in the 19C anyway? It must have been discussed at the time and maybe the person saying "ok from now on white moves first!" may have played better with white, had he played better with black he may have said "ok from now on black starts first!"
Dec 18, 2014
0
#17
Elubas wrote:
batgirl wrote:
White hadn't always been required to move first. That rule wasn't agreed upon until the late 19th century, so in chess-years, it's somewhat recent.
So then were there games in the 1850s in which black went first? I've never seen an old game presented like that. Or when the games are put in the database do we change any games where black started into "white goes first" form if you will?
Even Morphy played the Black pieces and went first in some of his games. I know for sure, those played in Philadelphia in 1859. Games in databases and even in later books are usually present such games with the first player being white. Most viewers, of course, couldn't handle it any other way.
lol, "1. e5 e4" just looks silly.
[COMMENT DELETED]
I frequently find that I am playing a black side, I have been analyising many games and more white players win than black. I think this chess rule is outdated and should be reviewed, so black and white start first alternately! Your views on this would be appreciated.