Being part entertainment business quite often sucks. Chess not having paying customers is probably one of the worst. But is not wrong. People don't wanna play to games being played then where the money would come from?
My understanding is that unless you are in the top 30, you can't survive by game winnings alone. However, you can still make a decent to good living through chess as a coach.
Coming to other sports, while they may have better winings, they also get better money from allied avenues, such as modelling.
Then there is this comparision with India, the cradle of chess for a good 1000 years or more before Europeans discovered it. Are you aware that the Indian variant of chess game, called shatranj, is still there but nearing extinction? At least there are avenues for you to survive on chess. In shatranj, as of today, forget survival, there is no way to identify top 30 players even in India.
Coming to other sports, while they may have better winings, they also get better money from allied avenues, such as modelling.
Then there is this comparision with India, the cradle of chess for a good 1000 years or more before Europeans discovered it. Are you aware that the Indian variant of chess game, called shatranj, is still there but nearing extinction? At least there are avenues for you to survive on chess. In shatranj, as of today, forget survival, there is no way to identify top 30 players even in India.
It very hard to make living in tennis as player.
www.quora.com/What-ATP-Ranking-does-a-tennis-pro-need-to-achieve-in-order-to-make-a-reasonable-middle-class-living
from the calculation at the top ATP list 200 will lose money on playing tennis. Without sponsorships wont be able to play. And being #200 probably does not attract too many sponsors. And tennis has paying customers television contract and all that stuff. If you wann make living out hobby you hobbyt better be some popular team game like football.
www.quora.com/What-ATP-Ranking-does-a-tennis-pro-need-to-achieve-in-order-to-make-a-reasonable-middle-class-living
from the calculation at the top ATP list 200 will lose money on playing tennis. Without sponsorships wont be able to play. And being #200 probably does not attract too many sponsors. And tennis has paying customers television contract and all that stuff. If you wann make living out hobby you hobbyt better be some popular team game like football.
This has been said by many GMs for years. There are a few more opportunities now for streamers and coaches, but many still can't manage.
I have an IM friend that makes a nice middle class living giving group web lessons to kids. But for several years he was in bad shape trying to get the business going, and would likely have failed if the pandemic didn't happen.
I have an IM friend that makes a nice middle class living giving group web lessons to kids. But for several years he was in bad shape trying to get the business going, and would likely have failed if the pandemic didn't happen.
"... Many aspiring young chess players dream of one day becoming a grandmaster and a professional. ... But ... a profession must bring in at least a certain regular income even if one is not too demanding. ... The usual prize money in Open tournaments is meagre. ... The higher the prizes, the greater the competition. ... With a possibly not very high and irregular income for several decades the amount of money one can save for old age remains really modest. ... Anyone who wants to reach his maximum must concentrate totally on chess. That involves important compromises with or giving up on his education. ... it is a question of personal life planning and when deciding it is necessary to be fully conscious of the various possibilities, limitations and risks. ... a future professional must really love chess and ... be prepared to work very hard for it. ... It is all too frequent that a wrong evaluation is made of what a talented player can achieve. ... Most players have the potential for a certain level; once they have reached it they can only make further progress with a great effort. ... anyone who is unlikely to attain a high playing strength should on no account turn professional. ... Anyone who does not meet these top criteria can only try to earn his living with public appearances, chess publishing or activity as a trainer. But there is a lack of offers and these are not particularly well paid. For jobs which involve appearing in public, moreover, certain non-chess qualities are required. ... a relevant 'stage presence' and required sociability. ... All these jobs and existences, moreover, have hanging above them the sword of Damocles of general economic conditions. ... around [age] 40 chess players ... find that their performances are noticeably tailing off. ..." - from a 12 page chapter on becoming a chess professional in the book, Luther's Chess Reformation by GM Thomas Luther (2016)
@MadhurVarshney said in #3:
> My understanding is that unless you are in the top 30, you can't survive by game winnings alone. However, you can still make a decent to good living through chess as a coach.
(...)
I am ranked 51 in the world right now and earn reasonably well (for Czech standards) by playing chess.
As for the video of Felix Blohberger, I agree with most of it. As for the part around 9:00, I would like to add that the friend whom he mentions (if we both mean the same one) eventually received about 1200 euros from the federation. (Not that much, but surely better than nothing.) The budget for the top Czech players for 2024 had been severely cut by the National Sport Agency, which manifested itself in some ways.
As for the perception of chess, I remember giving a simul at a big square in city with 100 000 inhabitants. I heard one opponent (or a spectator?) telling to another one: "He plays chess professionally. I am not sure if it is legal." The image of chess is actually not bad, but such things happen from time to time.
> My understanding is that unless you are in the top 30, you can't survive by game winnings alone. However, you can still make a decent to good living through chess as a coach.
(...)
I am ranked 51 in the world right now and earn reasonably well (for Czech standards) by playing chess.
As for the video of Felix Blohberger, I agree with most of it. As for the part around 9:00, I would like to add that the friend whom he mentions (if we both mean the same one) eventually received about 1200 euros from the federation. (Not that much, but surely better than nothing.) The budget for the top Czech players for 2024 had been severely cut by the National Sport Agency, which manifested itself in some ways.
As for the perception of chess, I remember giving a simul at a big square in city with 100 000 inhabitants. I heard one opponent (or a spectator?) telling to another one: "He plays chess professionally. I am not sure if it is legal." The image of chess is actually not bad, but such things happen from time to time.
It leads to the question:
If 90% of chess professionals make a living by coaching,
why do they study chess playing so much and not
how to be an effective chess teacher (and manage a coaching business)??
In mathematics there is a similar question: a small % of PhDs get jobs where their main focus is research. Most teach in smaller colleges or do industry jobs like risk analysis. But their PhD programs come close to ignoring teaching and preparation for jobs in industry.
If 90% of chess professionals make a living by coaching,
why do they study chess playing so much and not
how to be an effective chess teacher (and manage a coaching business)??
In mathematics there is a similar question: a small % of PhDs get jobs where their main focus is research. Most teach in smaller colleges or do industry jobs like risk analysis. But their PhD programs come close to ignoring teaching and preparation for jobs in industry.
There's a section in Kotov's THINK LIKE A GRANDMASTER, apparently intended for Soviet readers, warning promising young players against planning on chess as a profession.