On Dec 7, 12:56 am, "David Kane" wrote:

DK ...I'd be curious if you could name a single sport that has
gone the other direction -where rules which produced decisive
results were amended in order to produce more "well-played" ties?

DK I can't, and I think the reason is obvious. Most people see
an important *purpose* of a contest being producing a winner.
In that light, ties are just failures. I suppose the "chess as art"
school
might sees things differently, but my games at least are way
too ugly to even remotely qualify.

The "chess as science" school might see things differently, too. The
only school that _clearly_ sees things the way DK does is "chess as
mass entertainment".

I do not mean to scoff at the plight of chess professionals who hope
to make a better living. That is a legitimate concern. I just think
the debate should be seen for what it is.

LT