You can't. I couldn't get exited about Magic the Gathering no matter how much they spice it up, because I don't understand it.
Why not focus on giving a better product to chess fans rather than fail to try to appeal to people who have no interest?
You are precisely correct.
Sorry. Don't hold your breath.
Chess is an acquired taste, and most folks will NEVER acquire it.
Live with it.
Quick games, show the faces of the players all the time - comment the emotions of the players rather than technicalities on the board.
I think chess is going in the right direction with livestreams and live commantary by pro's. Moar of this!
Maybe they should change the tournament environment to some place more welcoming rather than a confined room full of portraits. For example, outside in a beautiful park. That way people are bound to notice and it might spark curiosity. The music could be improved as well. Something bright, playful, and exuberant like Antonio Vivaldi.
On second thought, the particpants might feel pressure and distracted by the noise. Chess certainly is a quiet game.
Cheerleaders? Who will these cheerleaders be? Women, I presume you mean? Then that further removes women from chess. We should all want women to be involved too in chess or else you disgregard 50% of the population when promoting chess playing. If you want to gain popularity with chess then don't push women to the sidelines.
Millionaire chess was, I'd say, a good idea to promote awareness of chess. But how many people have such a sum of money to participate in millionaire chess? It's not a very practical approach and definitely not sustainable in the long term. However, like I said, it's a good campaign.
Maybe they should change the tournament environment to some place more welcoming rather than a confined room full of portraits. For example, outside in a beautiful park. That way people are bound to notice and it might spark curiosity. The music could be improved as well. Something bright, playful, and exuberant like Antonio Vivaldi.
On second thought, the particpants might feel pressure and distracted by the noise. Chess certainly is a quiet game.
Nice idea 
Why not show a documentary where an annotator with personality goes over some of Lasker's games? His famous game against Bogoljubov where he drew after some intense complications and against all odds should get people interested.
dragonair234 wrote:
Cheerleaders? Who will these cheerleaders be? Women, I presume you mean? Then that further removes women from chess. We should all want women to be involved too in chess or else you disgregard 50% of the population when promoting chess playing. If you want to gain popularity with chess then don't push women to the sidelines.
It's marketing, not a rights issue. Don't take it personally.
I think it's funny that people are worried about bringing more spectators to chess when every major chess event that gets streamed live proves that the chess world is not ready or capable of handling a larger audience.
The US championship final round this week could not even get audio working for the first 20-25 minutes with a meager 2000-3000 people spectating. It was pretty bad, which is unfortunate because the double 3-way ties in the men's and women's brackets made it one of the most exciting championships ever.
Meanwhile:
- The chess equivalent of FIFA is run by someone that claims to have been kidnapped by aliens. Kidnapped. By. Aliens.
- The largest chess site on the planet can't stop a single determined spammer, for weeks on end.
Yeah...not ready for more people, I'm thinking.
Physician, heal thyself.
Lose a pawn, lose a toe.
Bishop/knight, finger.
Rook, costs a lung.
Queen, firstborn child
Checkmate, there's your head.
What about electric shocks for losing anything(unless you can get it back, of course) and reducing possibilities of draw(have you seen going on TCEC Superfinals)?
It is much more human and better than killing them. Though we can make a Chess Colisseum for prisoners or offer something for free to the crowd or simply market it well, reducing costs for books and that stuff. We could held a league for businessmen and laymen as well, where no master(well, not a full-time chess player) would participate. In those I think some masters would be willing to provide some hints to the people(eg. Look for tactics or ask the best move).
Then the game may be interesting. And betting is also there, so losses should be treated more seriously.If prize is big, none will be willing to lose.
Well, I will try something myself in 20-30 years, making it the national indoor game of world(whatever it may be called). Till then I don't think much may try to do it.
Ashikuzzaman.........I do not agree with all of that. You want EXCITEMENT, colour , music etc. TURN IT INTO A CARNIVAL EVENT. The players can be enclosed in a sound proof room . In the audience area BIG screens showing chess moves .........many of them so your eyes can flick from one to the other . In the interim ice creams ..hot dogs ...drinks..chess stuff on sale for those not so interested . Bring along a few GM 's and IM to perform live classes...........Presto EVERYONE WILL COME , even non chess enthusiasts
It's obvious from the posts here what the answer is. Some sort of physical mutilation would need to be involved with each loss of material. I like the rated system where more valued material costs the player more in loss of limb. If pawns are fingers, a queen has to be good for a couple of below the knee chop jobs. If the player lost parts in other matches, we go after family member parts and so on. Once family is exhaused, we move on to pets and family friends. Beyond that.... the audience. Cable of course...
Some people want their 15 minutes of fame. The way it is won't get then that...
This thread reminds me of the many others, such as is chess a sport?...why isn't chess in the Olympics?...how do we get more people interested in chess?
Well, it is a kid's board game that is boring to the vast majority of people. It's akin to if someone wanted to get me interested in Cricket.
It's not "a kids' board game" at all. Very few "kids" develope an interest in it. As for cricket, far more "kids" are interested in that than chess. Nobody who does not understand cricket developes an interest in the game until he does gain some understanding. The same is true of rugby union.