chess960

Maybe is a circular and frequent subject in the forum, but why chess960 is not so popular?
-
just 1% or less of the games in RHP (or elsewhere) are chess960 compared with the real chess.
-
any thoughts about this variant?
-
(by the way... how to play chess960?.... for example what are the main ideas at the opening? Same as in chess? just looking for weakness in the pawns? control center? etc.. etc...)

Originally posted by Schlecter
Maybe is a circular and frequent subject in the forum, but why chess960 is not so popular?
-
just 1% or less of the games in RHP (or elsewhere) are chess960 compared with the real chess.
-
any thoughts about this variant?
-
(by the way... how to play chess960?.... for example what are the main ideas at the opening? Same as in chess? just looking for weakness in the pawns? control center? etc.. etc...)

Last I checked, RHP didn't have proper chess 960 - castling wasn't possible. RHP can't expect something to be popular when they don't implement it correctly (I.e., the way that everyone's used to playing it).

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Last I checked, RHP didn't have proper chess 960 - castling wasn't possible. RHP can't expect something to be popular when they don't implement it correctly (I.e., the way that everyone's used to playing it).

even with a perfect implementation of chess960, no many people is going to play this variant.
-
I feel chess960 start position problem is so complex that make the board very ugly to play.
-
maybe the chess960 idea has a weakness in the design, something is missing....
-

Originally posted by Schlecter
even with a perfect implementation of chess960, no many people is going to play this variant.
-
I feel chess960 start position problem is so complex that make the board very ugly to play.
-
maybe the chess960 idea has a weakness in the design, something is missing....
-

The main idea is to avoid opening theory. At the master level, that makes some sense. A case can be made that the static start position makes preparation too important.

But recent experience in the gambit fantasy club's convinced me that I have barely scratched the surface of playable openings at my level.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
The main idea is to avoid opening theory. At the master level, that makes some sense. A case can be made that the static start position makes preparation too important.

But recent experience in the gambit fantasy club's convinced me that I have barely scratched the surface of playable openings at my level.

That's true, classic chess is so complex, that just 1 'start position' is too much for a single life!!.
-
I think ches960 could be like some kind of 'training' for the real beast. My personal opinion is that the traditional setup is actually the best. But playing chess960 its a lot of fun by itself.
-
I found that it is possible to castle in RHP implementation if the King and Rooks remains in their classical chess squares when set-up a start position.

-

for example, RHP implementation allows casting for this type of setup

-
the chess960 player has a kind of 'chess problem' trying to decipher what are the secrets of that particular SP (start position).
-
walking for the web I found a 'Greenspawn' of the variant: http://chess960jungle.blogspot.ca/2015/06/chess960-puzzle-no-16.html
-
his puzzles are the start position!!. Enjoy

I just don't like the chaotic opening array in chess960. It's a hard game to love with the ugly setup.

I've played quite a few chess960 games but always go back to "old Faithful" Orthodox chess.

Originally posted by homedepotov
I just don't like the chaotic opening array in chess960. It's a hard game to love with the ugly setup.

I've played quite a few chess960 games but always go back to "old Faithful" Orthodox chess.

I agree with that, but still I think chess960 is good for training purposes or just for fun as is each chess variant, that kind of thing that everyone just try because is different