..With today's announcement that the next "World Chess Cham-
pionship" will be held in October, of '08 {see, chessbase.com}
for details; Though I'm reasonably sure that the 12 games held
under "traditional time-controls" {Ugh!}.. will have at Least
a modicum amount of interest, but assuming that they're refer-
ring to the 40/120 {3 minutes, averaged-out..per move}, I was
hoping that those outmoded 'T/cs' had gone the way of the "dodo
bird"!
..Since time-pressure often leads to mistakes, aren't mistakes
bound to happen anyway{?}.. especially in these projected 5-to-
6-hour games, where the human attention-span is Not at its peak?!
 
..Personally, I'd rather see a "World Championship" result {in
Any contest of mental-wits} based on something Other than who
has the better physical and mental stamina, for an almost guaran-
teed series of excruciatingly drawn-out games!
 
..Three minutes per move{?!}.. isn't a 'part-and-parcel' of these
sorts of contests based on what one Already Knows about chess?!;
rather than trying to 'invent' new-theory {if there be such a thing},
over-the-board?!
{Consider this, my 'whistling-in-the-{strong} wind', editorial}.

no man that's what it's all about. mental and physical exhaustion. might as well be computer vs computer otherwise.

.. I'll have to agree with my 'good friend' "HALLofMIRRORS," on this
one, 'DS'..{Yuk-yuk}.. but leaving the 'handle aspect' of this aside,
Assuming that physical and mental exhaustion IS "what it's all about,"
at the highest competitive-levels of chess... Surely, there are more
'mass-appeal' ways of identifying with this concept; as in, let's say..
a 24-hour {minimum} 'marathon session' of Many Multiple games of
chess, played at faster time-controls{!}
 
"Parkinson's Law": A British writer {C. Northcote Parkinson} formu-
lated this rule: "Work expands to fill the time allotted to it."
..Simply said, 'If you have an hour to do a 5-minute job, it will
take an hour to do it.'{!}
 
..Perhaps in your 'own world', having a player sit on his 'butt',
and deliberate for let's say, 2 minutes & 45 seconds {or more}
while deciding whether to play, 'Nh3' or 'Nf3', or perhaps even,
'a3' as his {or her} first move, indicates a 'depth' of flexibility
and 'open-mindedness' of approach, compared to another player
who sits down, and right away plays 1.'e4' {for example} lacks;
but is the former 'more deliberative' player, a deeper thinker?!..
Hardly!
.. More Boring for the average 'borderline' chess enthusiast
{and More of a 'turn-off'} to watch?!.. Most certainly!
 
..'Imho', if our beloved game Is Ever to gain a greater foothold
in the public and mass-media perceptions, doing away with this
literal slow-motion reputation of our game, is {I believe} ob-
jectively, 'Step number 1'!
 
{"Parkinson's Law," as you know, has practical benefits also,
in the 'white' and 'blue-collar' work-fields.. which are too
obvious to mention}.

"Parkinson's law" I can attest to that. Since I retired, I get up in the morning with nothing to do, but by night I got it all done.

watching chess is pretty boring, i agree, but it's pretty obvious that if chess produces a character (like bobby fischer, or topalov's manager, or kamsky's dad) then it gets fun, like wrestling.
 
i don't want to see perfect play. i want to see pressure. i want to know that morozevich woke up late and thats why he didn't win the soviet championship. that's interesting. chess is a sport.
 
i agree there is no public appeal to this game. Today it's game shows and distractions and short attention spans. But that is missing the point of chess. Chess is a game where Kings make decisions about where to move forces, it's not about popular opinion. It's an exercise in decision making. Saying chess isn't popular is like saying engineering or mathematics isn't popular. Mathematicians and engineers are really not concerned about who cheers that the proof is correct or the draft is complete...