playBunny: I agree completely. I have also been wanting an additional set of "Normal Game" stairs with a decent time limit. (The only set of stairs with "Normal Game" are "Very Fast Fischer Stairs", which for ME personally are too fast! And the Standard Stairs take too long, since the games are played one after the other, instead of at the same time. Plus with so many draws, there isn't enough movement in them.)

playBunny: A 2 win match would then be unfair for 1 player in the games in which 1 color has an advantage over the other - since 1 player will get the advantage twice.

Of course I agree with you for many of the games - well sort of, for most I would rather see just a 1 game match. I know my 3 day Stairs (no cube) (Sstairs in ◙ The Gammon Cube ◙ Fellowship) are pretty popular with just 1 game matches.

BIG BAD WOLF: MMMM.. true.. good point.

It would be nice if there was at least a way to have the 2 games of the match, be played at the same time (like in tournaments) instead of one after the other.

I do think a set of stairs using "Normal Game" (1 game matches) (fast, standard and slow) would be popular. Yes, you can get them in some fellowships, but they tend to have less people participating.

Fencer did say he would think about it, the last time I asked him about the possibility. :-)

playBunny: I have to agree with BIG BAD WOLF (and not only because sharp teeth are more persuasive than floppy ears). With the match types currently available on BrainKing, it's not possible (except in backgammon and its variants) to create a match that is fair to both players and has no possibility of a draw. For my part, I prefer fairness over drawlessness, and I hope the existing stairs will remain as they are.

Having said that, I would have no objection to the creation of additional stairs with single games or 2-win matches or whatever. And maybe you'll have more success than I've had in my attempts to get a set of Fischer-clock stairs with longer time controls.

Another possibility would be the implementation of a new type of match, similar to the n-win matches, but with pairs of games (rather than single games) as the basic building block. Thus after the first two games, if one player has reached some predetermined victory condition, then he wins the match; otherwise they play two more games, etc.

KotDB: Lol. You do agree with me. -- it's not possible (except in backgammon and its variants)

Given that I was prompted to make my posts as a result of getting nowhere on the Ludo 2-games Stairs, and that I otherwise only play Backgammon and its variants, it's nice that you do agree with me. ;-) BBW's objection on behalf of the starter-has-the-advantage games is no problem for me and I agree that 2-wins isn't a flawless solution to the problem there. But in fact I have no idea whether there is a problem perceived by the climbers of those Stairs, so I won't make any claims on their behalf. ;-)

But on the other solutions put forward, I don't see much difference between a single game and a 2-wins match. The starter in a single game has the advantage. More so than in a 2-wins match, surely? I like your paired-games idea. 2-wins of paired games. It could make for a lot of games, though, lol, but at least it would have a winner.

I don't particularly mind what solution was be used, just so that in games where draws are most likely there be some way of playing only for a win. Restricting it to game types where there's some small difference between the who-starts-wins percentages (say 5%) does makes sense although, in the long term, players wouldn't benefit from the advantage given that starting colours are randomly assigned in the Stairs.

playBunny: I don't think colors are randomly assigned. It looks to me like the challenger always makes the first move.

But random color assignment would be a decent system. Even if a game is tilted heavily in favor of one color (Maharajah chess, anyone?), the combined procedure of first randomly assigning colors to the players and then playing the game is fair.