Jan Pieter wrote:
In 2003 we already played an experimental tournament with this rule, but with one difference: after a breakthrough the game continues, and the player with the king only wins when he survives. To put it in other words: a regular game is played and only when there is no winner, the victory goes to the player who first got a king. In this way draws are also impossible but the game stands much closer to draughts as we know it.
I think it also is more of a challenge for programmers. The breakthrough draughts of Gérard merely seems a matter of brute force, since games won't last long.
Yes the breakthrough draughts as I defined it eliminates all plays with kings. Is is a major change; I agree that the game will last not so long but surely it becomes very complicated. I quite understand your proposal but the result of the game may appear quite unfair in common situations.
White to play
According to your rule white is winning but that looks not logical because it seems that black managed to build a clear advantage so that white has to give up two men in order to reach the king row.
Why not reversing the rule : the winner is the side who obtains the last king.
With this new rule it seems to me that all endgames with 1K+2M against 1K is winning for the side with a material advantage.
In the example above, black wins simply by reaching the position
and now black gives the two pieces 9 and 13 in order to win by 36-41.
I know that is a pity that white wins in the following diagram
white to play
But this sitation seems very exceptional and the probability is very high that black could have won by delaying one of its promotion.
Small tweak to your proposal: win =
opponent is out of moves (=current rules) ELSE
(first to get 1 king AND opponent gets at most 1 king) ELSE
(first to get 2 kings AND opponent gets at most 2 kings) ELSE
This similar to the rules in eg high jump in athletics: highest distance wins, then least attempts. Here: most kings wins, then quickest to get the equal number of kings.
So eg 1K+2M vs 1K should usually win for majority, unless minority gets first king and can block majority from getting 2nd king, but this should be rare.
The advantage here is that equal games where one side is ahead in tempi and gets first king wins the game as long as he manages to prevent his opponent from getting 2nd king first. This keeps the race character of the regular game of trying to get a king as quickly as possible. It is easy to keep track of as well, since piece identity is irrelevant.