chess

The Americans are getting restless. After the booing that greeted some draws of the Kasparov-Anand match in New York, mutterings have been heard about changing the rules.

The first suggestion, advocated in Daniel King's book of the match, adapts the standard US solution to all problems: if something doesn't work, throw money at it. The idea is to have a large proportion of the prize money linked to decisive results in individual games. Each draw increases the pot for the next game, like a rolled-over lottery.

While that might enthuse the spectators, however, it will hardly motivate the players, who know very well that a world title is worth far more than the winner's purse.

Another idea, supported in Raymond Keene's book, is to replay draws at fast time limits. Which could turn a 20-game match into 7 slow games and 13 quick games. Fun to watch, but no test of true chess skill.

Here's the best all-American answer, combining the essential ingredients of money and speed: a draw scores 1/4-point to each contestant and - here's the clever bit - the contestants personally refund the entry fee to the spectators. The remaining half-point is then contested in a rapid replay. Another draw would add 1/8-point to the scores and put more money in the spectators' pockets. Well, it would stop the booing.