Single Comment

Mats:  You wrote, in part 'Truth is that hardly anybody knows what Omega
Chess is.'   
Response: Okay.  I can help remedy that.  Those who want to read more
about it can go to this informative site: www.omegachess.com

Mats also wrote, in part:  'And this is what we are trying to remedy here
by discussing which type of chess variant could appeal to the average
player.'
Response: Chess already appeals to the average player.

Mats wrote: 'Fide-chess is approaching a crisis. The game is becoming too
well-researched.'
Response: I disagree.  Sure, if we take the sum of man's knowledge it is
well researched.  But when we play the great game of chess we are dealing
with a single human mind.  It cannot possibly retain all that
well-researched material.  One player may know the Halloween Gambit... it
is likely that most players will not.  Even when someone plays a Sicilian
Defense... will the Smith-Morra Gambit take him by surprize?  What about
the Grand-Prix Attack?   Because we have human mind vs. human mind, chess
is very exciting.  Strategic and Tactical abilities outweight opening
knowledge.  Opening knowledge won't help you in an endgame.  It won't
help you find a clever mate-in-three.  There are over a billion possible
positions after just the first few moves in a game of chess... it is
hardly played out.  I've been reading some long lost chess documentation
from the year 1590... guess what, it is exciting stuff that can be used
again today over 400 years later.  People that want to play something
besides chess can.  I see no need to cure the non-existent illness. 


Mats wrote: In my country 50% of the players have been lost in 20 years,
for a number of reasons. And they don't turn to Makruk or Omega Chess.
My response: That is their perogative.  If they want to abandon chess,
fine by me.  But I'll keep playing it, and Shogi, and Xianqi, and Navia
Dratp, and Kamikaze Mortal Shogi, etc.  I don't need the rest of the
world to join in.  Just one opponent per game is fine.