Functional Exchanged chess

I proposed new variant to diminish memorization in chess play.Everybody have different capability in memorizing moves lines in chess play.This differences will give advantage to the one of both player.It create an unbalanced initial condition in this play.To overcome memorization,we can exchange the functional move of a piece with other piece.For instance,the functional move of bishops could be exchanged with knight moves.So,the intial board setup is shown below.The way bishop moves was changed into the way knight moves.By this way,the player memorization is being disrupted by different appearance of it's pieces figure.The player will be more concern on this new appearances and tactical also positional moves rather than remembering the next moves lines they got used to play.

The exchanges can also be made between rook and knight or another possible combination involving rook,bishop,and knight functional exchanges.Finally,the true winner is the one who more responsive to new changes.

Chess 960 was already invented for the purpose of eliminating opening theory. What you propose is swap the pieces' shape and name. This preserves the opening theory entirely and beyond that I don't see the point at all.

Yes,it preserve the old opening theory.But,let's see whether it could be easily perceived with these exchanged shape appearances.It will consume quite time to transform it in our mind.I think players will sacrificing the old opening theory rather than sacrificing tactical and positional time.Moreover,the configuration is able to be changed suddenly in a tournament,so it just leaving the tactical and positional time in a game.

Hi 50mark, I invited you for a chess 960 game so you can experience that.

As far as i know,chess 960 is a regular chess game with the initial setup board is random (computer generated).It is different than Functional Exchanged chess. 

This is not a Chess variant. It is just normal Chess played with non-standard pieces. You might as well play Chess with frog, sheep, Smurfs or Star Wars puppets.(Yes, you can buy all of those as Chess sets!)

The fact that  certain pieces is not attached to certain kind of moves make it quite deceiving in a game.It is because a certain piece could representing different task in different board setup configuration,so it could blur final board arrangement being observed from tactical and positional perspective.It is different if we use the Smurf pieces,because for the long term the pieces task was meant to be permanent.So the players will remember pieces task as the same all the time.  

The final aim of this means is to give novelty in every game,because players unnecessarily to match certain pieces with certain task.These pieces task was determined in current game.It could be possible that in the same tournament, each board use different configuration.So,the pieces task will give novelty in every game.One configuration shouldn't be a favor for a player.Board configuration is determined in the draw.

It is true that one can hinder players in all kinds of ways in percieving the board position. You could also blind-fold them, or blow dense clouds of smoke over the board. I don't deny that this can be extremely annoying to them. But it does't make it a Chess variant.

Actually I don't meant to create a new chess variant.It is just a need to overcome too much memorization that make this unfair for one of both players.I hope it could leave only tactical and positional capability.

Btw,blind-fold chess seems to involve symbols memorization.

I propose that we create a new form of racing. Some athletes are faster than others, which gives them an advantage. So in this new form of racing, the athletes won't have to move from their initial positions at the start line. This creates a much more fair form of racing.

I hope to be sure that chess is not a memorization capability racing.It should always be as two newbies in chess play chess for the first time after they understand the new chess rules.

Memorization is only one of the skills involved, and not the most important one by a long shot. Pattern recognition, coolness under pressure, visualization, imagination... and even fantasy... are more important.

But I would object to attempts to eliminate any of the skills from the mix.

Isn't it a bit presumptuous for someone to think that chess players and enthusiasts have been on the wrong track for hundreds of years, and that only you can straighten them out?

I like chess the way its been played since the Middle Ages. Then again, I'm an old fart.

I propose that Bolt has to start 10 yards back or carry a twenty pound weight when he races, because his faster running ability gives him an unfair advantage.

The different capabilities of individuals is what makes all sports worth watching.  If you want to remove the advantage, I suggest you improve yourself.

edit:

Sorry, I didn't read blueemu's post (#10) first.

Let's avoid all the God-given advantages and just give everyone a trophy.

I want to make chess more attractive for every one.Besides,the winner should not to be worry.It just a suggestion.

Then you've failed. Your suggestion doesn't make chess more attractive for me, and I am part of "everyone".

Back to the drawing board.

The true winner should not to be worry.

I thought of people getting older will decline in chess performance because of declining memorization capability.This decline also influence tactical speed.

Good point. Let's make a rule against playing combinations your opponent doesn't see. 

It needs more time to spot that.

Pattern recognition is also kind of memorization.Whether memorization declining is also affect this recognition.