Fide already created Fischer-Random-World-Championship, but I believe they should also create a No Castling championship, or they should just use the No Castling in case the standard World Championship ends in a draw after 12 games, what is your opinion? https://en.chessbase.com/post/wesley-so ... d-champion
Re: Should FIDE Create a No Castling Championship ?
Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 7:47 pm
by satyendrainbhopal
FIDE SHOULD consider reviving the true spirit of the game. Developers have gone miles now to create working models of chess engines.
CASTLING Was taken from the WORD KileBandi or Durgamya whoch means a fort which is very difficult... Castling had purpose Which lost its use in FIDEs variant of classical chess.
Re: Should FIDE Create a No Castling Championship ?
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:08 pm
by Jonathan003
I wonder if new tools for opening preparation could not help to lower the draw rates in classical chess?
Like the true percentile output in Fat Fritz that displays the expected wins, draws and losses, for a variation.
Also better opening training software, like the (hopefully) upcoming Chess Position Trainer 6. The opening trainer of Chesstempo witch is in beta stage. And the new opening training with Fritz 17.
Maybe Grandmasters wil feel more confident to take there changes on alternative opening lines with the use of these new software.
If you see the rising YouTube video's about chess, it seems like chess is more popular than ever.
I woud like to see 'No castling Chess', and 'Larry' chess, as alternatives to Fischer random chess. But I personally at this moment would like to keep classical chess as it is, the main game of chess.
I also think of some other way to produce more exiting games in classical chess.
What if player would play each-other without knowing the pairings before the game? Or even to play each-other anonymously?
If each player would sit alone at a chess board without knowing ho he's opponent is. Than they would think less about what's the opponent repertoire might be.
It could be done with these exiting new digital chess boards:
Re: Should FIDE Create a No Castling Championship ?
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:00 pm
by Nordlandia
That is just wishful thinking. Up to this point it has taken many years of lobbying effort to make Chess960 become a thing OTB.
Re: Should FIDE Create a No Castling Championship ?
Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 4:27 pm
by satyendrainbhopal
Jonathan003 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:08 pm
I wonder if new tools for opening preparation could not help to lower the draw rates in classical chess?
Like the true percentile output in Fat Fritz that displays the expected wins, draws and losses, for a variation.
Also better opening training software, like the (hopefully) upcoming Chess Position Trainer 6. The opening trainer of Chesstempo witch is in beta stage. And the new opening training with Fritz 17.
Maybe Grandmasters wil feel more confident to take there changes on alternative opening lines with the use of these new software.
If you see the rising YouTube video's about chess, it seems like chess is more popular than ever.
I woud like to see 'No castling Chess', and 'Larry' chess, as alternatives to Fischer random chess. But I personally at this moment would like to keep classical chess as it is, the main game of chess.
I also think of some other way to produce more exiting games in classical chess.
What if player would play each-other without knowing the pairings before the game? Or even to play each-other anonymously?
If each player would sit alone at a chess board without knowing ho he's opponent is. Than they would think less about what's the opponent repertoire might be.
It could be done with these exiting new digital chess boards:
Castling mean KileBandi Durgamya going back to castle... but wait where is the castle....
Re: Should FIDE Create a No Castling Championship ?
Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:26 pm
by satyendrainbhopal
Nordlandia wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:00 pm
That is just wishful thinking. Up to this point it has taken many years of lobbying effort to make Chess960 become a thing OTB.
Chess 960 is a good effort but opponent should be free to decide their alignment..
Another factor is missing like pawn (unit os soldiers) repelling the opponent diogonally and then marching ahead. This is how war is fought.. Pawn kill the opponent straight forward and not diagonally... but this has become so distorted since milleniums that it has become a norm...