Are the chess rules ideal?

[Mats Winther]

Have today's chess rules attained perfection, or can they still be improved in some way, leading to an enhanced variability? What would happen if the castle move was modified? I suggest the following.

Extended castle: when castling the king may jump three squares, but it can also jump two as usual. The rook ends up on its usual square. In Chess with Extended Castle, queenside castle will occur more often as this practically gains a tempo compared with standard chess, where the king nearly always moves again to the knight file. Certain opening systems might benefit from the extended castle, such as the King's gambit, the Wienna Game, or the Dutch Defence. Especially, the queenside castle systems in the Sicilian would be improved.



Obviously, if this little rule change could infuse new life into the King's gambit, then chess would benefit greatly.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/chesswithextended.htm

Mats

[Mats Winther]

There is a lopsidedness to today's rules. In practice, queenside castle takes two moves, whereas kingside castle takes only one move. What's the point in maintaining such an imparity? Why should kingside castle be favoured before queenside castle?
/Mats