- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Over the board 960

#11

Thank you for all those examples, it sounds like Europe has a lot of opportunities. In NY people are usually pretty open to play casually, but I don't know of anything organized like that. I'm glad there are opportunities for club players too. I wonder if I would have to sign up with chess federation and get an official rating to participate in something like that, I suppose it depends who is hosting

Thank you for all those examples, it sounds like Europe has a lot of opportunities. In NY people are usually pretty open to play casually, but I don't know of anything organized like that. I'm glad there are opportunities for club players too. I wonder if I would have to sign up with chess federation and get an official rating to participate in something like that, I suppose it depends who is hosting
#12

Frankly, I think 960, or 958 if you exclude the normal and mirror positions, are far too many positions. Could it not be something to shrink this number down to 100 or thereabouts. 100 positions that more or less resemble a normal setup. G. K. said 20 years ago that frankly speaking 95% of the positions are like poison in the eye. Rather, he said if the remaining percentages would be more like normal chess symmetry there might be a chance that this format could be something

Frankly, I think 960, or 958 if you exclude the normal and mirror positions, are far too many positions. Could it not be something to shrink this number down to 100 or thereabouts. 100 positions that more or less resemble a normal setup. G. K. said 20 years ago that frankly speaking 95% of the positions are like poison in the eye. Rather, he said if the remaining percentages would be more like normal chess symmetry there might be a chance that this format could be something
#14

Thank you Sargon, though I’m not sure if I follow, do you know of places to play 960 otb? You seem very invested in this thread I suspect you might. Thank you again for your dogged attention to my 960 question. I too enjoy 960 and hope it continues to grow

Thank you Sargon, though I’m not sure if I follow, do you know of places to play 960 otb? You seem very invested in this thread I suspect you might. Thank you again for your dogged attention to my 960 question. I too enjoy 960 and hope it continues to grow
#15

@perplextase said in #11:

Thank you for all those examples, it sounds like Europe has a lot of opportunities.
Europe is pretty big place. relatively speaking that is very limited opportunities. Most countries have 0-1 Fischer chess events.

@perplextase said in #11: > Thank you for all those examples, it sounds like Europe has a lot of opportunities. Europe is pretty big place. relatively speaking that is very limited opportunities. Most countries have 0-1 Fischer chess events.
#16

Why is that? I just don't get why most chess players stick to old strategies instead of trying out new and exciting stuff. They’d rather walk the same old trodden path than dive into something fresh and different.

Why is that? I just don't get why most chess players stick to old strategies instead of trying out new and exciting stuff. They’d rather walk the same old trodden path than dive into something fresh and different.
#17

@petri999 said in #15:

Europe is pretty big place. relatively speaking that is very limited opportunities. Most countries have 0-1 Fischer chess events.
There are some minor events in the Czech Republic, typically in Brno (more per year), Ústí nad Labem (one per year) or in Pardubice within the Czech Open in July, but most of them are unfortunately not attractive for GMs or IMs, unless you live/stay near.

@petri999 said in #15: > Europe is pretty big place. relatively speaking that is very limited opportunities. Most countries have 0-1 Fischer chess events. There are some minor events in the Czech Republic, typically in Brno (more per year), Ústí nad Labem (one per year) or in Pardubice within the Czech Open in July, but most of them are unfortunately not attractive for GMs or IMs, unless you live/stay near.
#18

@Nordlandia said in #16:

Why is that? I just don't get why most chess players stick to old strategies instead of trying out new and exciting stuff. They’d rather walk the same old trodden path than dive into something fresh and different.
There are enough players who would happily participate, but few organizers and sponsors.

@Nordlandia said in #16: > Why is that? I just don't get why most chess players stick to old strategies instead of trying out new and exciting stuff. They’d rather walk the same old trodden path than dive into something fresh and different. There are enough players who would happily participate, but few organizers and sponsors.
#19

@RealDavidNavara said in #18:

There are enough players who would happily participate, but few organizers and sponsors.

Yeah, I get that there are some hurdles here and there. But can I ask you a direct question. It seems that strong chess players for various reasons deliberately avoid playing or experimenting with unorthodox (fairy pieces) what do you think about chess with new pieces. It certainly does something with the piece dynamics when new pieces are introduced and present on the board.

@RealDavidNavara said in #18: > There are enough players who would happily participate, but few organizers and sponsors. Yeah, I get that there are some hurdles here and there. But can I ask you a direct question. It seems that strong chess players for various reasons deliberately avoid playing or experimenting with unorthodox (fairy pieces) what do you think about chess with new pieces. It certainly does something with the piece dynamics when new pieces are introduced and present on the board.
#20

@Nordlandia said in #19:

Yeah, I get that there are some hurdles here and there. But can I ask you a direct question. It seems that strong chess players for various reasons deliberately avoid playing or experimenting with unorthodox (fairy pieces) what do you think about chess with new pieces. It certainly does something with the piece dynamics when new pieces are introduced and present on the board.
While Chess960 is the basically same game as standard chess, just with a much broader set of starting positions, variants with fairy pieces or modified rules are somewhat different games. In some of them (King of The Hill, for example) standard chess skills matter more, in others (Racing kings) they matter less, but it takes a lot of time to reach a grandmaster level in standard chess, so many players are understandably unwilling to start anew from a much lower level in a different game. While it is good to try out something new (unless it is harmful), the switch between the variants and standard chess can sometimes be confusing for many players.
There are chess players who play many other board games like go or (different variants of) draughts as well, and there are others who focus on chess and prefer non chess-related hobbies. Both is fine.
My view is that there are many different variants of chess which make sense, but the biggest problem for the majority of them is that there are too few players. Personally I very much like the way how standard chess works and how Chess960 works. Some variants like Three-check or Horde require a good theoretical knowledge to avoid a quick disaster, and I am not very willing to learn much theory there, as there is already a plenty of theory in standard chess. And in some variants, Black is suffering from the very beginning. I do not write this to discourage anyone from playing them. For example, if you like bullet, starting from a poor position is less of a problem than with the 3+2 time control.

@Nordlandia said in #19: > Yeah, I get that there are some hurdles here and there. But can I ask you a direct question. It seems that strong chess players for various reasons deliberately avoid playing or experimenting with unorthodox (fairy pieces) what do you think about chess with new pieces. It certainly does something with the piece dynamics when new pieces are introduced and present on the board. While Chess960 is the basically same game as standard chess, just with a much broader set of starting positions, variants with fairy pieces or modified rules are somewhat different games. In some of them (King of The Hill, for example) standard chess skills matter more, in others (Racing kings) they matter less, but it takes a lot of time to reach a grandmaster level in standard chess, so many players are understandably unwilling to start anew from a much lower level in a different game. While it is good to try out something new (unless it is harmful), the switch between the variants and standard chess can sometimes be confusing for many players. There are chess players who play many other board games like go or (different variants of) draughts as well, and there are others who focus on chess and prefer non chess-related hobbies. Both is fine. My view is that there are many different variants of chess which make sense, but the biggest problem for the majority of them is that there are too few players. Personally I very much like the way how standard chess works and how Chess960 works. Some variants like Three-check or Horde require a good theoretical knowledge to avoid a quick disaster, and I am not very willing to learn much theory there, as there is already a plenty of theory in standard chess. And in some variants, Black is suffering from the very beginning. I do not write this to discourage anyone from playing them. For example, if you like bullet, starting from a poor position is less of a problem than with the 3+2 time control.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.