Challenging the Status Quo
In today's world, it often feels like we are encouraged to just accept the status quo. This is ironic, considering we have an incredible amount of information at our fingertips. While it's crucial to learn from experts and build upon their knowledge—"standing on the shoulders of giants," as Isaac Newton put it—it's equally important to critically examine what the experts say. Does it make sense to you? If not, don’t just dismiss their advice; engage with it, ask questions, and see if the reasoning behind it aligns with your understanding.
I’m inspired by a quote from Marshall Ganz: “Challenging the status quo takes commitment, courage, imagination, and, above all, dedication to learning.” I believe that as we age, we often lose the curiosity to ask "Why?" like we did as children. Staying inquisitive and questioning the norms not only keeps our minds sharp but also pushes us to think beyond conventional boundaries.
With that in mind, I'd like to propose a few ideas that challenge the status quo in chess, aiming to make the game more intuitive, fair, and exciting for both newcomers and experienced players alike. The first two, I honestly think should be implemented ASAP. The third one is intensive and will probably make the purists mad. If it does make you angry, please take a break, and once you're in a more serene state of mind, comment how you'd improve the status quo. Let's get to it!
1. Allow Capturing the King
Let's start with a concept that may surprise some but seems quite intuitive to many: allow the capturing of the King. I would argue that more than 50% of the world already thinks this is how one wins a game of chess! For beginners, especially children, the concept of checkmate—where the King is under attack and cannot escape—can be confusing. Have you ever tried to teach a four-year-old that you can't actually capture the King to win? It's not fun!
By allowing the capture of the King, we simplify the rule. If you leave your King in check and your opponent captures it, you lose. This small change would make chess more understandable to the general public, especially for those new to the game. It also adds a dynamic element for beginners: even if you're down in material, there’s always hope. A single oversight by your opponent could result in a win if they forget to safeguard their King. In my view, if you leave your King in check, you deserve to lose.
In my opinion, this change would make chess more approachable and exciting. It would reduce the steep learning curve that comes with understanding abstract concepts like "check" and "checkmate," making the game more accessible to everyone, from young children to casual players.
2. Get Rid of the Touch-Move Rule
Another long-standing tradition in over-the-board (OTB) chess is the touch-move rule, which mandates that if a player touches a piece, they must move it. As a chess teacher, I've seen countless beginners—mostly children but some adults too—become discouraged by this rule. Imagine the following position:
However, in all of the excitement and nervousness of trying to defend against the "Greek Gift Sacrifice", Black touched their Queen, before playing 14...Kg8!
With the touch-move rule, they would be forced to move the Queen and likely resign--because they would have to play 14...Qxg5?. Worse, they might claim they didn’t touch the Queen, leading to an unsolvable "he said/she said" scenario for the Tournament Director.
Instead, a much better system could be "Clock Move." Here, a player's move is only completed after they've pressed their clock. If a player notices they're about to blunder, they have the chance to reconsider before committing. And if an opponent is about to blunder, a savvy player can maintain a poker face, waiting for the opponent to finalize their mistake by hitting the clock. At that moment, if the blunder is confirmed, they can capitalize on it.
The "Clock Move" rule would put the onus on players to be more careful and strategic about their moves. It would eliminate disputes over accidental touches and foster a more forgiving environment, especially for beginners. Under this rule, the player who hits their clock has only themselves to blame—not an outdated touch-move rule.
3. New World Championship Cycle
This one might be a bit more controversial, especially among the purists. It's okay if you don’t agree, but I encourage you to keep an open mind and consider whether there’s some merit to this idea. I propose a new World Championship cycle that divides the chess year into distinct seasons and culminates in a dynamic, multi-format World Championship event. Keep in mind this is only for players that are world championship candidates. Local events do not need to be held to such a stringent schedule, although it might be a cool idea to align their seasons with the seasons of the best chess players. So a local club player can pretend that they'll be the next Magnus Carlsen; who knows, they might just be!
Here’s how it would work:
January to May: Rapid/Blitz Season
From January to May, the chess calendar would focus exclusively on Rapid and Blitz formats. Tournaments held during this period would award Grand Prix points, with only the top four tournament performances for each player counting toward their total score. This would encourage players to participate in multiple events but also allow room for experimentation and recovery if a tournament doesn’t go well.
June: Rapid/Blitz Portion of the World Championship
In June, the World Champion and the top two point-getters from the previous year's Grand Prix would compete in the Rapid/Blitz portion of the Chess World Championship. The format would involve each contestant playing 2 Blitz games and 4 Rapid games against each of the other competitors, totaling 4 Blitz and 8 Rapid games.
Scoring:
July to November: Classical Chess Season
From July to November, the chess calendar would focus exclusively on classical time formats. Just like the Rapid/Blitz tournaments held during this period would award Grand Prix points, with only the top four tournament performances for each player counting toward their total score. I would suggest more grand prix points awarded for the Classical season than during the Rapid/Blitz maybe at a 60/40 clip.
December: Classical Portion of the World Championship
The same three players from the June Rapid/Blitz would conclude their battle at the end of the year in December. Taking the scores that they already earned in June, it's a race to 64+ points. The first player to 64+ points is declared the World Champion of Chess for that year.
Classical Schedule*: *Players are Denoted by World Champion (WC), #1 Point getter, besides WC (#1) & #2 Point getter, besides WC (#2)
2 Players Get to 64+ points at the same time/Tiebreaks:
If two players get to 64 points, or higher, then the player with more points is declared the World Champion. In the unlikely event that two players get the same amount of points, that's 64 or over, then it would go down to a tiebreak:
The next day, the players would switch colors and play a Classical game. The winner of any tiebreak game would be declared the World Champion. If the Classical game ends in a draw, then the next day, they would switch colors and play a Rapid game. If the Rapid game, ends in a draw, they would switch colors and play a Blitz game, later that day. If the Blitz game is drawn, then they would play an Armageddon game, and the winner of that Armageddon game would be declared the World Champion.
This format introduces several advantages:
-
Diverse Skills Showcase: It allows the best players to showcase their skills across different formats, not just classical chess. But with more of the points will be coming from classical chess. Also because games of classical chess, rapid & blitz, the winner of this World Championship could (rightly) be declared the World Champion of Chess, not just Classical or Rapid or Blitz.
-
3 Participants instead of 2: With 3 participants you get a whole different style added to the mix. If your strategy is to draw most of your games and pick up a win here and there, you better watch out for the 3rd participant. They might be gunning for more wins, especially in Classical where wins are incentivized! Also, spectators will have a game to watch every day, even when one of the players is getting rest!
-
More Inclusive and Exciting: Rapid and Blitz are already highly popular among fans, and this would make the World Championship more inclusive of different styles of play, offering a fresh perspective. Classical chess would still be exciting because the participants can get the most points from Classical games. Another bonus is that the winner of the title of World Champion will very likely come from a Classical game.
-
The World Champion will be incentivized to play year round: The way it works now, the World Champion is usually studying and hoarding their prep for the challenger that they know they will face. Year round, we don't get to see the World Champion's full powers. The way this system would work, is that, the World Champion would have a slight advantage in that they get to play their Classical games first...BUT...if they end up not winning the World Championship that year, they will not automatically be seeded in the next year's World Championship Cycle. It behooves them to play year round and get in the top 2 grand prix point getters, otherwise, they might not win the World Championship and then be out for the next year's World Championship Cycle.
Conclusion
Challenging the status quo in chess isn’t about disregarding the game’s rich traditions and history. Instead, it’s about fostering a spirit of innovation, inclusivity, and adaptability that can breathe new life into a game we all love. As we move forward in a world brimming with information and potential, let’s remember to stay curious, ask questions, and keep pushing the boundaries of what chess can be.
By reimagining some of these long-held norms, we have the chance to make chess more intuitive for beginners, more forgiving for developing players, and more exciting for everyone. It’s time to challenge the status quo, embrace change, and evolve with the times. After all, that’s how we grow, learn, and keep the game of chess vibrant for generations to come.
Feel free to comment if you liked or disliked (but please stay cordial) any or all of these challenges to the status quo. Also, if you have a suggestion for a positive way to challenge the status quo in chess, please do share!
And mostly importantly: Stay Impressive!
NM Craig C.
