On Dec 6, 11:56 pm, "David Kane" wrote:

Don't you think that its noteworthy that in most sports ties are
either impossible or fairly rare, and in those sports where they are
possible, most of them have taken some steps to reduce their
number? (tiebreaks, OTs, scoring incentives etc.)
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?

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.

I don't contest this at all; I find it regrettable that people think
there must be a winner and a loser. That's not a problem with the
game, that is a problem with people.