checkers vs chess

I played checkers yesterday with a friend who does not play any boardgames.  I beat him but it was not as easy as I thought at all.

Thank you for your contribution.

Can't decide if this thread or 'most beautiful checkmate in history of chess' was more underwhelming... Probably the latter to be fair to you.

Have started a new club here and invite anyone interested in Checkers or Draughts to join the club.

https://www.chess.com/club/checkers-and-draughts-enthusiasts

Alright, alright, enough spamming. This is becoming the checkers forum...

Everyone has preferences.  Some people don’t like chess.  I do.  And checkers 

Checkers and other same-piece-games like Go are easier to learn to play but not necessarily easier to learn to master.

For those between newbie and master, like the vast majority of us here, I think chess gets the edge as the "better game" because there are more strategy and tactics and opening motifs to learn and use on a non-master level.  After all, look at all the threads we get on these forums where a 1000-ist player proclaims that an opening on which recent world champs thrived is "garbage," "no-longer good," etc.

On the other hand, in the early '90's the Bishop's Opening had been out-of-favor for over 60 years when I introduced it to the high school team I coached and we rode it to three consecutive county championships and three consecutive State Scholastics Tournament Team Trophies.

Though they seem inherently less complicated, one weird advantage of "same-piece" games like Go and Checkers/Draughts is that when the game is apparently played out, all can be made new simply by expanding the board, which introduces another level of complexity without changing the rules.  Actually, you can even turn tic-tac-toe, long since repeatedly solved by children the world over, into at least a bit of a short-term intellectual duel for adult minds by expanding the grid; then it is not quite so simple as one might think, as one can see easily by playing a bit on bigger and bigger hunks of graph paper.  A more complicated issue arises with chess, because when the board is expanded inventors always feel a temptation to fill the larger void with new pieces, such as the queen-like Archbishop (knight-bishop) and Chancellor (knight-rook) to match the Queen familiar to us (bishop-rook). 

(BTW, fortunately for the purpose of expanding chess, "fairy chess" offers a wide assortment of new pieces, more or less strange. "Fairy chess" enthusiasts consider standard chess to be just one variant of a great assortment of possible games.  And I had thought actually the chess knight was just about the weirdest thing ever devised!) 

Only a rap battle against the two will decide the true winner

i like chess

i kinda hate checker

who will win? checker bishops or an army of kings ?

Kings easily.

i think chess is just built better.

They move diagonally one space forward and jumps over a piece to capture

I think chess is better than checkers because chess has different kind of pieces checkers has only pawn

Interesting. A very simplistic view of checkers.

You copy me