Swap the K and Q start positions as White?

How would swapping the initial placement of the King and Queen--for White only--affect the game? Instead of Fischer Random/Chess 960, is this a viable alternative for serious chess? Castling would still be the same: the King moves 2 squares to the left or right. I like this much more than adding two new pieces, as in Seirawan chess (Hawk and Elephant), or expanding the board to 10x10. Or does simply swapping the K and Q as White leave us with the same problem of opening theory in that it too will eventually be played out? What if both players got to choose whether or not to swap placement of their own K and Q at the start of the game (unbeknownst to the other player as an option)? To me, it leaves the idea of chess as two armies fighting the same as the original. In FRC, the armies are all over the place and loses the feel of original chess, in my opinion. In this variation, however, it is just the K and Q (the commanders) trading positions, saying to each other, "All right. I have this side covered, you get the other side."

Allowing both sides to choose whether or not they want to swap King and Queen creates more opening theory--at least twice as much--which has got to be enough to keep chess interesting over the board. It is too much for one person to memorize, isn't it? I say let the professionals play this version, and if the tournament/match comes to a draw, make them play FRC at regular controls instead of blitz.

How does swapping the K and Q affect the advatage of White? If Black is also allowed to swap the K and Q (assuming White abstains and keeps the K and Q on their original squares), how is the advantage affected?

Advantage Black?

Castling Kingside is often more natural than Queenside in normal chess.

I'd happily bet its Kingside castling is far more common.

But in that position castling ""Kingside"" (queenside in old money) leaves Black with a piece majority on that side of the board, and better chances for attack.

imo.

Which negates the advantage White has by going first? Maybe?

First of all, the terms "Kingside" and "Queenside" are no longer relevant because of the starting position. As for advantages, white is probably stronger in this version of chess. The idea is that since the queens are in line with their opponent's king, quick attacks will be stronger than in regular chess. However, this is really just another fruitless attempt to change the game of chess.

Wow, you totally messed this conclusion up! If both kings castle short, white will also have a majority on the old kingside. The advantage of going first, plus the king being safely tucked away in short order will lead to a stunning, or at least reasonable, advantage for white.

This position is impossible in FRC as both sides are supposed to mirror each other.

I think black is better, beacuse on whites every move he respondes with d5!, going for fast king strike, beacuse queens bishops is stronger.

Black is better than White? Or Black is better than Black would be in original chess?

If K and Q would swap places, black would be better than white, and I would prefer black, beceause black attacks all time. For white only hope would be something like Quick Q side castle.

Im not convinced. But it is true that every side would want his king off that line with the enemy queen asap. It would be interesting to try it out some time.

True, but I never wrote that.

You certainly did write it. I did not pull it out of thin air, and I would not make it up. I do not know you from Adam. It is a direct quote. Let go of the pride. We all make mistakes. No big deal.