It seems to me other posters are being very reasonable with their responses. I think most of us of a certain age have been hearing “Classical Chess” is dying for the past 40 years. Classical will outlive all of us, simply because of the reasons we have all explained already. It seems that you just DON’T like classical, and you personally find it very boring. Many of us do not. For those who do not like it, there is rapid, blitz and bullet. But those of us who spend hundreds and even thousands of dollars a year in books and learning materials, won’t be rushing to buy books on “How to improve our blitz”, or books on collections of games from the “Blitz” or “Rapid” world championship any time soon. I simply believe in “Live and let live”. I encourage everyone to play the version of the game that best suits them. I don’t imagine anyone here wants to ban blitz or rapid from events, just because we hold that classical is the epitome of chess. You on the other hand, seem very angry with classical and would love to see it disappear and be changed into a “Lite” version of it. I don’t understand it. Many people find classical music “Boring” and constantly tell me “that music is boring and just puts me to sleep”. For those people in my life, the best music is the current top 40 pop, hip-hop and dance music. I say AWESOME. Whatever makes you happy. But nothing tickles my soul and my brain like music from the Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods. I also enjoy modern Jazz and fusion, classic rock and even European power metal. People have been saying “classical Music is dead” for literally over a century. What they really mean by that is that it’s not played in popular radio stations, on popular TV presentations and does not make even a fraction of the money that pop music makes.
However, all Major schools of music in the world center their musical instruction on classical and Jazz, because they are the highest musical forms from which all else derives. Thousands of people keep symphony orchestras alive by going to their concerts and buying their recordings. Bach, Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Haydn, Wagner and others have survived and WILL survive the test of time. Chess has always been a fringe activity, completely outside of the mainstream. It has survived under those conditions for many hundreds of years. If the mainstream forgets it again, chess lovers will keep it alive as they always have. No need to please the mainstream by altering it in any way. Not even the computer revolution will undo chess. Simply because even if computers “Solve” chess to they point of being able to announce “Forced Mate in 50 moves” right out of the opening, good luck finding a human being who is able to force that mate by memorizing the mane hundreds of thousands of possible lines that lead to that forced mate in 50. I suspect that as long as there are humans in the universe, there will be classical music, and there WILL be chess at the highest level.
BUMP
good points @Zjlm1015
[deleted-UpbeatAngle]
A I think you mean Saddam Hussein B what about is relevant to the discussion at hand @Hdhxhhddb
it is very unfortunate, i like classical chess waaay more than blitz and shorter games.
In the actual Romantic era (mid 19th century) there were NO time controls. Those great games of Tal's you admire were played with classical time controls, as were ALL the brilliancies of the past. Players simply cannot come up with as many top-quality moves with so little time to find them.
Tal's games were played at 40 moves in two-and-a-half hours time control.
You have to go back to the 1880s or earlier to find tournaments with unlimited time control.
So... before Lasker (WCC 1894).
No castle, exclusively 1-square pawn moves, no en passant, no stalemate and 2hr no increment would do the trick, but I like classical. Though I would prefer shorter games.
Tal's health also deteriorated as time went on. Alcohol and drugs took a toll on him. So it's hard to separate the two effects... the competition improving vs Tal deteriorating.
Certainly he couldn't dominate the way he did in the pre-Fischer era.
The funny thing is that all the great players like Tal, Rajabov and Aronian (and even Nakamura and Botez), didn't get so strong by playing Blitz or Rapid or "Hand and Brain", but by spending hours over chess positions.
I agree that 6 hours are a bit excessive these days... especially in amateur tournaments when you have to play two games a day. But I don't think 30 minutes games should be the new standard time control.
Also why would you want to bring the Romantic Era back, where it was considered "unmanly" to decline a gambit? I suppose you wouldn't tell authors or painters to trash modernism?
We all know that we will find better moves more often and make fewer blunders if we take a couple of minutes to think about our move. Tournaments awarding IM and GM norms and matches leading to the world championship MUST be played in conditions that allow the players to produce their very best chess.
Most serious players want to produce the highest-quality chess they possibly can, and improve their play and their understanding of the game. This can only be accomplished by using enough time to figure out what you think is the BEST move, not the first thing you think of.
I get a lot more satisfaction from winning a game by outplaying my opponent--achieving an advantageous position, exploiting it to achieve a winning advantage, and playing the endgame precisely to cash in the win, or coming up with a fine combination leading to a winning attack than I do from picking up a hanging piece that my opponent didn't notice because he was rushing through a fast time control.
Notice how nearly all the games you see analyzed in depth on chess.com are classical games. That's because there's more of interest in these games--who wants to analyze or study games where most of the notes would just point out mistakes and point out better moves that could have been made.
As far as more excitement and quick conclusions (instant gratification) bringing in more "fans" and more money--that's just grabbing for a few quick bucks. How many people still play the video games that were the biggest sellers ten years ago? Changing chess to become today's fad won't keep it popular tomorrow. Elvis Presley was the greatest musical sensation of his time, but how often do you hear his recordings today? Mozart is still popular worldwide 230 years after his death.