|
You'll note that I said 'it wouldn't surprise me to learn.' I'm not speaking from a position of authority here, and aside from the mechanics of it do not claim to be stating any sort of fact. Just my thoughts on the game based on my understanding of the rules.
I claim no real expertise on the strategic aspects of checkers, as I haven't played since childhood. My comment was regarding only the relative complexity of the games, which is a different metric from difficulty.
It's often true that a simpler game is easier, but that's not universal. Golf is a simple game, but anyone who hits the links for the first time will quickly learn that the simplicity of it doesn't make it easy.
I posited above that a game of checkers is 'over' relatively early on, as compared to a game of chess. Your talk of mistakes being fatal and irreversible seems to confirm that, and is a function of the simplicity.
The relative simplicity of checkers is why it's a solved game, while chess is not.
Naturally, a function of checkers being a solved game is that we already know that two people playing perfect games will end in a draw. We might posit, then, that checkers is more about spotting and exploiting errors in your opponent's judgment, as well as attempting to create situations that cause such blunders. I'm thinking something like reducing an opponent's moveset sufficiently that all moves end in catastrophe.
Perhaps I should amend my above statement, as I see now the reasoning was flawed. It might be more accurate to say that a highly skilled player is able to project how the game will end as soon as his opponent makes a mistake.
__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said
- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame
|