Who is better: black or white?

@TomKirkmanDS Speaking of racism, you managed to put some misogyny in here too. I'm impressed!

At the beginning of a game, white has a very small advantage. But this is only really a factor at the higher levels of chess. For most players, the starting color generally doesn't make a difference and the outcome is decided by who plays better. It is generally believed that white's advantage is not decisive and black can draw with proper play and even win if the white players makes bad moves.

On Atomic chess, white starts out with a huge advantage (White makes developing moves like Nf3 and e3, while Black is forced to make moves like ...f6 to prevent white from blasting the king.

White gets to move faster, black gets more information before moving. This naturally makes white the attacker and black the defender.

In practice, white seems to be slightly better, but only slightly. Tournaments are generally designed to ensure players get an equal number of times playing as white and an equal number times playing as black, or close to it, so it doesn't really matter. At the very highest levels of the game, grandmasters are often trying for the draw as black and trying for the win as white, and everyone is hoping for their opponent to make enough of a mistake somewhere that whatever their opponent is doing will fail.

Theoretically, we don't know what the truth is about white or black's respective positions. Chess is not a solved game, which is why it's so much fun to play. Our understanding of the game continues to evolve. Still, common sense (and results) would seem to indicate that white should be winning with absolutely perfect play by both players, just because white gets to act first.

Well if you look at the computer's suggested "best" moves in the analysis board, it will almost always lead to a draw if depth is greater than 15-17 or so.

So now chess will die via a "draw death". What rule of chess can we change to prevent that?