- Kasparov on chess 960 and preparation (chess.com): Re Kasparov's emphasis on retaining the possibility of opening preparation, 'Where's the fun in playing an opponent who spent the last month analyzing some opening sidelines with Fritz/Rybka? Is chess just about rewarding hard work?'
Once again, the dichotomy between chess at the professional level and chess at the amateur level enters the discussion. I never get tired of saying, 'the first rule of chess is to have fun', but perhaps this doesn't apply to professionals.
- Kasparov on Chess960, et al. (iccf.com/forum): 'For serious correspondence chess, as opposed to casual correspondence chess, playing chess960 games is a step in the WRONG direction. The reason is simple : the human knowledge effect in the games will be further reduced since the engines that are already affecting classic correspondence chess have zero problems adapting to chess960.' Followup: Chess960 the answer for serious CC?.
Since Kasparov said nothing about correspondence chess, this is a non-sequitur, but nevertheless an interesting opinion. I'm not aware that anyone has suggested that chess960 changes the impact of engines in correspondence chess and I suspect that engines have the same advantages (and disadvantages) in both traditional chess and in chess960. This is certainly true after the opening, when the games become indistinguishable. As for the opening, what difference does it make if the correspondence player uses an engine on the first move in chess960 or on the Nth move in traditional chess when theory is coming to an end?