Fischer Random, or Chess960, has seen growth and interest at the super-GM level. This tells me that it’s an accepted and interesting form of chess, especially since a sponsor is willing to place money into it (Mainz Classic).
Fischer Random can be an re-invigorating aspect of US chess if we bring this down to the class player with rated tournaments. Of course this should be a separate rating system and not affect classical chess ratings.
I’ve polled about 150 active Chicago area class-level chess players and there has been expressed interest in the variant.
Pairing software wouldn’t have to be changed and the existing rating system can be used for calculations. However we would have to address what rating to start people from (unrated or something else) along with other rules for tournament organizing. Obviously there would be a cost associated with adding this into the USCF system.
I would propose to start it off with only Regular time controls (not Quick or Blitz) and as it’s built upon expand it out to Quick and Blitz.
I’m going to post this also in other forum for those that normally don’t participate in the Issues Forum.
OK, I’m revising my prediction. In several years the USCF will have the following rating systems:
Slow Chess
Fast Chess
Blitz Chess
All Time Controls, Slow, Fast or Blitz
Slow Chess 960
Fast Chess 960
Blitz Chess 960
All Time Controls Chess 960
All Time Controls All Variants (ie, classic chess and 960 chess)
Correspondence
Internet
Mike has made this point before about ‘ratings-list-bloat’ and/or ‘ratings-fragmentation’, and it is still a valid point.
I wonder whether the current “Quick” rating should be re-named and be given an expanded definition?
Its new definition could simply be – Any formal game that is not appropriate for the members’ primary rating.
Gotta start small and accept imperfections, keep it practical.
BTWay, I wonder whether class players would have more interest in chess960 IF the tournament announcement listed the ONE new setup that would be used for all games?
(Like RNBBKNQR, important that White’s two knights start on the same shade of square for a change; and after 1. e3 e6 this setup can be reached by legal moves.)
I know this sounds antithetical to the whole idea of FRC, but really FRC is a compound idea, but it still gives players the following variety of learning experience:
(1) Make irrelevant the esoteric variations that players have memorized for the traditional setup.
(2) Give players an opportunity to see what chess is like from a different setup.
Maybe class players would enjoy the opportunity to plan some basic openings a few moves deep, in a totally unexplored setup.
.
Sure there could be rating bloat. Too many ratings and people don’t care. But there’s no evidence either way. I would rather err on the side of giving more options but start it slowly with just Regular Chess960 ratings and leave Quick and Blitz out of it for now.
I asked this question and it was about a 65/35 split in favor of knowing the setup before hand. I would leave this though to the organizer to announce the setup in their TLA or other advertisement. You can argue even a different starting point for each round.
The problem would be that some people think that there are already too many ratings. A lot of people don’t take their quick rating seriously, especially TDs/organizers. Look how hard it is to find a tournament (that I don’t organize) that uses quick ratings for pairings or prize purposes. What makes you think that adding extra ratings would make things any better?
Oddly enough more ratings might actually make the over the board rating more attractive instead of less. With 20 variants it is the Golden rating and thus just naturally more important. With 5 variants it may still be the Golden rating but it actually seen as competing with the others more. The argument against many ratings seems to be one of simplicity. The argument for many ratings seems to be one of selection and choice.
Here’s another idea. Start with the standard position, play 10 moves, and only then choose a 960 initial setup. The setup would be chosen at random, by computer, without regard to the current position after move 10, and would not be known to the players in advance. The transformation imposed by the initial setup would be applied instantly after black’s 10th move.
If, for example, the random setup shows a rook starting at b1, then the knight that was originally on b1 (no matter where it is now) would instantly become a rook after move 10.
If, after the transformation at move 10, either player’s king turns out to have been captured, that player loses immediately. If both kings have been captured, the game is immediately drawn. If neither king has been captured but black is now in check, black loses immediately (as white can simply capture the king).
[1] I agree that any chess game that starts with any setup other than the one traditional setup – should be considered as an FRC/chess960 game; regardless of whether the setup was pre-announced well in advance.
[2] I did not know the following until today:
“The Chess960 rules have officially been implemented in the FIDE rules this year, and the acceptance of the Chess960 tournaments in Mainz has been a decisive reason for FIDE to accept Chess960 in their handbook.”
Don’t forget other popular forms:
Internet with computer assistance
Bughouse
time odds
material odds
loser’s
With tongue firmly implanted in cheek:
Why not rate FRC/chess 960 as you would any other game of chess depending on the time control? The rules do not DISALLOW it (if announced in advance). I would rule it as legal and ratable.
This same arguement is being used in order to rate another variant as “Quick”. After all, everyone knows that G/5 means “Blitz” whether it is stated or not, and in spite of the fact that the Blitz rules specifically state that it IS NOT quick chess and that it IS a variant.
In my opinion (a minority of one, I’m afraid), rating FRC as regular makes more sense than rating Blitz as Quick (which we now do, in spite of the rules).
I think I am going to hold a Shogi tournament and submit it for rating under the Regular system. After all, Shogi is a very popular and accepted variation of chess, and the rules do not disallow it (if advertised in advance). Better yet, why not Shogi (round 1), Xiang-Qi (round 2), FRC round 3, Chatranj (Round 4), and what we call Chess (round 5).
No one will show up, but it will be fun!
