Why is blue for boys and pink for girls?
Why should we stop at red and go when it is green?
Why should man have short hair and women long hair?
Why do we lock things turning clockwise?
These are all conventions. They have no sense at all, in spite of the fact that they do have some historic origins.
That is the same with chess and go, someone someday decided that one coulor should start. The reason of the chosen coulor may not make any sense today.
I guess because when chess was invented, you could not buy colour television sets yet
I guess because when chess was invented, you could not buy colour television sets yet
Finally a reasonable explanation for why aren't the pieces pink and orange instead of black and white.
Without colour television, how would people see the diference?
These folks don't look very happy, especially the queen, but the color looks right. 
Why does the rook look so stupid, so unimaginative?
The chessmen were discovered in early 1831 in a sand bank at the head of Camas Uig on the west coast of the Isle of Lewis, in the Outer Hebrides of Scotland.
I'm pretty sure that I read that black was considereda lucky color, so white got the first move?
I'm pretty sure that I read that black was considereda lucky color, so white got the first move?
There is Black jack. We really need to sort this thing out and get to the bottom of it all. Black gets to go first in GO!
Probably the queen looks sad because in the Middle Ages' chess it was indeed a useless sad piece.
Only in the end of the XV century the queen was given the good move ability it has now.
Indeed Firefalcon is correct based on this:
In medieval times black was thought to be a lucky color. The white player was allowed to go first since the black player already had the advantage of the lucky color.
Source: http://www.teachnet-lab.org/ps101/chornik/chess/chesshistory.htm
If this "lucky colour advantage" is really the reason, than I couldn't be more acurate when I said some posts ago:
"The reason of the chosen coulor may not make any sense today"
Probably the queen looks sad because in the Middle Ages' chess it was indeed a useless sad piece.
Only in the end of the XV century the queen was given the good move ability it has now.
Yes. I remember now.
Queen once moving two squares with jump, diagonally or straight.
Didn't a real queen have something to do with this chess piece having more power? I read it somewhere, but forget.
Conventions like this just simplify things by setting a common standard. Ever noticed that pieces are referred to as White and Black but squares are generally labeled light or dark? There is no real reason for that, other to avoid possible confusion in discussing a position.
Well, there is the reason that the pieces are generally an approximation to black and white, but the squares are not.
There does not appear to be much agreement or restriction on board color, from FIDE or other organisations. [I recall hearing that one of the conditions Fischer placed on playing a match in 1972 was that the board have green and yellow squares, to which Spassky graciously agreed.]
Black also goes first in Othello (Reversi) and in Checkers. The strange part about that is that going first is a disadvantage in Othello and has no advantage in Checkers.
Why is blue for boys and pink for girls?
Why should we stop at red and go when it is green?
Why should man have short hair and women long hair?
Why do we lock things turning clockwise?
These are all conventions. They have no sense at all, in spite of the fact that they do have some historic origins.
That is the same with chess and go, someone someday decided that one coulor should start. The reason of the chosen coulor may not make any sense today.
1. I wear pink and i'm a boy.
2.Because it is the law.
3.Are you living under a rock? Men have been doing long hair since the 60's and vice bersa.
4.A good one on your part.
Why is blue for boys and pink for girls?
Why should we stop at red and go when it is green?
Why should man have short hair and women long hair?
Why do we lock things turning clockwise?
These are all conventions. They have no sense at all, in spite of the fact that they do have some historic origins.
That is the same with chess and go, someone someday decided that one coulor should start. The reason of the chosen coulor may not make any sense today.
1. I wear pink and i'm a boy.
2.Because it is the law.
3.Are you living under a rock? Men have been doing long hair since the 60's and vice bersa.
4.A good one on your part.
Men have been doing long hair since the origins of the Mankind, mainly the ones who lived under a rock in the pre-history. Man having short hair is a very modern convention.
I was just listing several social conventions that have no sense at all. Of course there are the ones who break them!! And it is ok if they break because, as I said, they have no sense at all.
Oh, by the way
please do not stop on green or try to unlock your door clockwise just because I said it is ok to break conventions.
The green and red stuff is already a law, so you may not break it.
And you can make your own door lock if you want, but if you already have one you will have to use it as its creator decided it should be. Sorry for that, but it is the cruel true...
I forgot all about starting this thread. Great comments with a nice dash of humor thrown in. 
I do have one question regarding the queen and her increase in power over the ages. Did her power increase do to a real flesh and blood queen wanting it so? I read something about this somewhere.
I don't know, but the change happened in the XV century Italy (1475, more precesily)and back them Italy didn't had a queen as it was not a unified kingdom, but lots of duchs, counts and other noble or churchmen rulers of fragmented territories. Some territories were Republics, with nothing close to a queen.
So, if it was really due to a real queen, perharps was about a foreinger queen (the powerfull Spanish queen, maybe?) or some noble lady represented as a queen in the board.
I am now googling key words to search this "real queen" stuff, but I got nothing.
I am now googling key words to search this "real queen" stuff, but I got nothing.
I remember. The "real queen" stuff came from my reading The Immortal Game by David Shenk, page 66.
" If Otto I's Queen Adelaide had likely been the original inspiration for changing the piece from Minister to Queen in the tenth century, the substantial boost in the Queen's power appears to have been inspired by Isabella, who for decades over the latter half of the fifteenth century reigned over the Castle and Leon regions of Spain in an extraordinary cosovereignty arrangement with her husband, King Ferdinand. Both rulers were avid chess players."
"Isabella was the personification of new female power, equally admired and feared. She helped unite Spain, reorganized the kingdom's finances, and instigated the Spanish Inquisition. It simply cannot have been hapenstance, argues historian Marilyn Yalom, that in the same country at the exact same time several influential chess authors proposed a new chess Queen with unprecedented powers on the board. 'A militant Queen more powerful than her husband had arisen in Castile; why not on the chessboard as well?' Yalom writes in her book Birth of the Chess Queen. "
I just watched this youtube video where Black goes first............................................ in GO.
GO has been around for 4000 years.
Why does White go first in chess? Did someone get it wrong a long time ago, and Black really should go first?
This is but one example of what challenges my mind on a daily basis.