user21318: The overall arrangement of the pieces in Chess960 seems so weird that I have a question about it: should there be castling at all?

user4399: In chess870, the answer is that the principles of castling in regular chess still apply. This is similar to asking if you should still control the centre, develop knights before bishops, etc.
What I haven't found to be discussed online (or even in Wesley So's chessable course) however is for the 90 positions of chess960 where castling on one side requires moving (or removing by a capture) a rook on the other side.
Sure the principles still apply, but I haven't yet found some article or video that gives some examples explaining whether or not you should give up castling rights on 1 side by moving that side's rook in order to castle on the other side.

user11749: Another reason why castling is good in 960 chess (and classical chess) is that it connects the rooks.
In the following example, Black quickly castled and connected his rooks, while White did not. This is not the only reason for White's defeats, but it is part of it.
[fen "nqbbrkrn/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/NQBBRKRN w - - 0 1"]
[title "Shankland - Vachier-Lagrave, Champions Showdown, Chess 960 2018"]

1. d4 d5 2. c3 Ng6 3. Bc2 c6 4. Ng3 O-O 5. h4 f5 6. h5 f4 7. Nf5 e6 8. Nxg7 Kxg7 9. hxg6 e5 10. dxe5 h6 11. Nb3 Qxe5 12. Bd2 Nb6 13. Qd1 Nc4 14. Nd4 Ne3+! 15. Bxe3 fxe3 16. Nf3 exf2!! {Brillant sac of the Queen} 17. Nxe5 Bh4! {and mat follow soon} 18. g3 Bh3+ 19. Rg2 Bxg3! 0-1


user21373: Yes, castling is good, especially when you are about to be attacked by say, a knight and queen, a king castling to the other side is very good. 

21318: <p>The overall arrangement of the pieces in Chess960 seems so weird that I have a question about it: should there be castling at all?</p>
 4399: <p>In <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/37082/how-many-chess960-positions-exist-in-which-castling-on-1-side-does-not-require-m">chess870</a>, the answer is that the principles of castling in regular chess still apply. This is similar to asking if you should still control the centre, develop knights before bishops, etc.</p>
<p>What I haven't found to be discussed online (or even in <a href="https://www.chessable.com/the-ascent-wesley-sos-fischer-random-strategies-and-tactics/course/31697/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wesley So's chessable course</a>) however is for the <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/37082/how-many-chess960-positions-exist-in-which-castling-on-1-side-does-not-require-m">90 positions of chess960 where castling on one side requires moving (or removing by a capture) a rook on the other side</a>.</p>
<p>Sure the principles still apply, but I haven't yet found some article or video that gives some examples explaining whether or not you should give up castling rights on 1 side by moving that side's rook in order to castle on the other side.</p>
 11749: <p>Another reason why castling is good in 960 chess (and classical chess) is that it <strong>connects the rooks</strong>.</p>

<p>In the following example, Black quickly castled and connected his rooks, while White did not. This is not the only reason for White's defeats, but it is part of it.</p>

<pre><code>[fen "nqbbrkrn/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/NQBBRKRN w - - 0 1"]
[title "Shankland - Vachier-Lagrave, Champions Showdown, Chess 960 2018"]

1. d4 d5 2. c3 Ng6 3. Bc2 c6 4. Ng3 O-O 5. h4 f5 6. h5 f4 7. Nf5 e6 8. Nxg7 Kxg7 9. hxg6 e5 10. dxe5 h6 11. Nb3 Qxe5 12. Bd2 Nb6 13. Qd1 Nc4 14. Nd4 Ne3+! 15. Bxe3 fxe3 16. Nf3 exf2!! {Brillant sac of the Queen} 17. Nxe5 Bh4! {and mat follow soon} 18. g3 Bh3+ 19. Rg2 Bxg3! 0-1
</code></pre>
 21373: <p>Yes, castling is good, especially when you are about to be attacked by say, a knight and queen, a king castling to the other side is very good. </p>
