In many starting positions in Chess960, the castling rules are awkward. It seems like they were just shoehorned in to copy the old chess even if it doesn't make sense in the position, such as having the king move right when long castling in some positions or having the king fly across the board in other positions. In some positions, the king doesn't even move!
A possible solution is to just only use the Chess960 positions that have the king start on the e file. Since the rooks have to be on both sides of the king, the king and rooks will be positioned on squares that make castling make sense. I think there are about 198 positions where the king starts on the e file.
Therefore, I think it's worth considering Chess198. It's the same as Chess960 with the additional rule that the king needs to start on the e file. This could make castling make more sense in Fischer Random.
I don't think it's an issue but there is another option. King always moves 2 squares and rook goes on the other side just like in standard chess but now after castling the king always ends up somewhere else.
The castling rules in chess960 are Just fine. If anything we should chess960 castling rules to normal chess to spice thing up.
@i-bex The issue with that idea is that if the king starts on the edge of the board, castling wouldn’t be possible close to the edge on some sides and would castling the other way would move the king to the center which doesn’t make sense.
@Katoh1 I agree the castling doesn’t hurt the game that much. It just feels arbitrary to preserve castling in the old chess.
@Prophiscient so restricting the King from additional two files is too much but restricting it just to e file is an improvement?
@i-bex Yeah. The issue isn’t with restricting the king. The issue is castling mechanics. Having the king castle towards the center of the board makes no sense. The point of castling is to move the king to one side of the board to attack on the other.
I’m not saying Chess198 is necessarily better then Chess960, but I think it’s at least worth considering to make castling make more sense. As it stands now, the castling feels contrived in some positions.
May I suggest we look at castling as a way to move the rooks closer to the center? Then what the king does isn't as interesting.
The simple "KRe" or "eRK" manoeuvre: The castling is always looked at from the "e" column. @Prophiscient
Either way, the King always lands "2 squares" from the left or right of the "e" column. If it goes left, then you have "KRe". If it goes right, you have the "eRK". The rook lands beside the "e" column, next to the "King".
Awkward: The 960 uses the standard chess castling symbols O-O or O-O-O that represented the amount of squares the rook traveled to reach the other side of the king. But in 960, it no longer adds up. They should have used "KRe" or "eRK". But it would have been awkward for the different languages.
Solution: When castling use my simple rule above. Then when writing the move down, take note of the side that has most squares from the "e" column. If the King castled on the side with least squares, then it's O-O and if it castled on the longer side it's O-O-O.
In the English language castling rule of thumb would be : KRe / eRK.
En Français, la règle d'or pour le roque serait : RTe / eRT
The letters change because of the names of the pieces in different languages but not the column.
@Toscani I’m not really concerned with the notation of the castle. I’m more concerned with the game mechanics of castling. In the old chess, castling is always the same. Having traditional long and short castling only makes sense if the king starts on the e file.
This can be solved by always having the king start on the e file, or just doing what 960 does. 960 castling feels contrived in some positions but allows the king to be placed almost anywhere which creates many more starting positions. Having the king always start on the e file means there will be fewer starting positions, but the castling rules feel more natural.
So I don’t think one is necessarily better than the other. It’s just worth considering the pros and cons of each.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.