Single Comment

First move advantage in Western Chess - why does it exist?[Subject Thread] [Add Response]

Joe Joyce wrote on Sun, Aug 12, 2012 06:41 AM UTC:

HG, I don't see why/how a first-move advantage would stay strong as piece
ranges decreases. From the BGG discussion, I get there are "hot" and
"cold" positions, and the hot ones are where whomever has the move has a
significant advantage, In FIDE chess that is very well-played, every move
is hot. The same does not pertain in Chief. Or at least I believe it has
been demonstrated that any possible first-turn advantage is so minimal that
black can pass on turn 1 without detriment. So at a minimum, first move
advantage is effectively gone. Therefor, the changes from FIDE to Chief
have eliminated the first move advantage. 

There are 5 changes, 2 of which I believe are irrelevant. Those 2 are: 1 -
chief is multimove, and 2 - chief has some additional movement
rules/restrictions, the leader rules. The 3 changes I see as at least
potentially relevant are: 1 - the greatly limited movement; 2 - expanded
board, extending the time it takes, even if only by a turn or two, to first
meaningful contact; 3 - all pieces can move both forward and back [and both
left and right.] And all 3 of these items come down to mobility in one form
or another. So am I wrong about why there is no sensible first turn ad in
Chief? Or doesn't what happens in Chief apply to FIDE? What am I missing?
Because if it's mobility in Chief, then a loss of advantage should occur
in 1-square, even if not to the same extent, no?