(Entschuldigung für das Englisch, Mein Deutsch ist nicht das Beste.)
Today it's necessary to learn long and tedious theory in order to play
serious chess. Today's grandmasters must be theoretically
well-prepared rather than intuitive and creative. Had orthochess been
somewhat more complex, then a greater choice of opening lines would be
at their disposal. In this way professional chess could remain
creative and stimulating. This would be a boon for chess at large and
ensure that it won't lose in popularity. In that way the game can
attract other categories of people who aren't particularly
theoretical, nor interested in becoming memorization artists. They can
become strong players anyway. My proposal is to enhance orthochess by
a relocation procedure, whilst keeping the option to play the standard
position. See the following link to an article with diagrams, and
programs that implement these changes:
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/che...onvariants.htm

/Mats

Clearly, this must be good for young people undergoing chess training.
In this way they can avoid getting stuck in opening studies. In a
strong tournament, however, one can consider playing standard chess in
the earlier rounds, and play the final rounds with relocation rules.
By then, the GMs have already made use of their superior knowledge
against weaker players and must now face each other.

The following provides a good example of the dilemma. The best opening
move is 1.e4. Suppose then that Black answers 1...e5.
But then you have no really strong alternatives to 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
a6 4.Ba4, etc. etc. So there is no other option than to play the
long variations in Ruy Lopez because all alternatives are inferior.
Italian game isn't really dangerous anymore. And one can't put one's
trust in the King's gambit, and combine like Adolf Anderssen. There is
no point playing the Vienna Game, etc.

Today, its becoming less and less worthwhile to play inferior
variants, due to opening preparations. It would be a great relief if
there existed an equally good opening system against 1...e5.
Only one single alternative would be a great boon. Today, one is
compelled to analyse and play the same professional opening lines to
the umpteenth move. There is nothing essentially wrong in such a
scientific approach, but it is slightly frustrating from a creative
point of view.

Of course, 1...e5 is not the only serious defence, Aljechin is
a superb alternative, as well as the Sicilian. I only gave an example
of the frustrating quality of the game, i.e. that after 1...e5 you
don't really have the same freedom of moves as you had in the
beginning of the 20th century. Theory is narrowing down because it's
not worthwhile to play the King's gambit when playing against a
prepared opponent.

Mats