I was asked the following questions by Misha Savinov, deputy Editor-in-Chief of the most famous Russian magazine 64 for an upcoming article. This is an article about the global economy crisis and the way it may affect chess.
The questions are:
How the global crisis will affect chess, in the short and in the long run?
and
Will I have to change my plans of organizing chess tournaments because of the economy crisis?
They are excellent questions and I already sent him my response. But I would like to know your opinion. What is your take?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
In the past few weeks we have been taking refuge from the global financial crisis by retreating into chess: following events where there are still big bucks from sponsors. But realism must sink in some time and we know that chess will also not be immuned to the global financial mess. Once recession sets in, the days of high prize moneys in high-profile chess events are likely to end. Give it two more months (or even shorter) and you’ll really see the crisis affect chess organisations. It’s going to hit the chess professionals and the sooner they realise this, the quicker it will be for them to readjust. Even for us amateur players, with sponsorship shrinking, there may be less local tournaments every where. I hope we all have our Plan B ready.
I think more people will play chess as they will have less money to waste on junk they didn’t need in the first place.
In a crisis, people, governments and businesses have to concentrate on things that matter, not useless waste-of-time and money things like chess and other sports.
Therefore if there really is a long-term crisis, funds for chess will dry up.
Chess activity was very limited during the Great Depression. If this crisis is of the same magnitude, expect the same.
We face an economic crisis and the brilliant bozos at the USCF want to get into the lawsuit game while the federation is losing hundreds of thousands of dollars. All members should file a class action against the Goichberg gang and make them reimburse the members.
Here are my thoughts:
There could be further increase in cheaper Internet On-Line play versus more expensive Tournament travel/brick-and-motor Club play.
There could be some shift in Internet On-Line play from Pay Servers to Free Servers.
There could be some decrease in super tournaments of high prizes and generous appearance fees. There may even be some super tournaments that become on-line tournaments. In such cases, there should be independent observers (hopefully somewhat local to avoid costly travel) sitting with participants to reduce any concerns that a player is getting aid from a computer, etc.
There could be some increase in used chess book markets and use of free library collections versus new chess book markets.
There could be a shift from regular chess to blindfold chess, so you don’t have to invest in any actual pieces or boards. (Just kidding!)
Good questions! My guess regarding funding for tournaments is that money will still be available for the “Top 10” super GMs, but there will be fewer events and fewer players invited to these super-elite events fighting for that limited pool of money. Appearance fees will diminish, because it will be a “buyers'” market for the top talent.
The professional players who will be hurt the most are the folks outside of the Top 10 (maybe Top 20), particularly those players who, for men, are between the 2550-2700 range and for women, anyone below 2550, who can currently make a living playing the circuit in Europe and perhaps a few big events here in the US. The money for those tiered events (big opens) may not dry up all together, but will be reduced. The same number of players will, at least to begin with, be competing for a smaller pool of money. Not a good scene. A lot of people will be driven out of chess as a profession as a result, and may not come back once things turn around again 2 or 3 years from now.
Another thought – as lots of the big opens are funded by lower rated players who pay entry fees without hope of winning a prize, as casual players feel the economic squeeze they may be less likely to spend limited dollars entering these events, cutting down the pool of money available for “comping” GMs and IMs and funding prizes.
Chess pros who give lessons may lose students as parents cut back on discretionay expenditures.
Large regional events that depend upon lots of people travelling in may suffer too, as people cut back on travel.
The big national scholastic events may suffer too, for the same reason – families cutting back on travel. It’s pretty tough to send sister or brother to a national tournament when dad has lost his job.
Jan Newton
Goddesschess.com
I do not think the economic downturn will hurt the web based USCL at all.
In-person tournaments may decline.
Chess sponsorship will be cut, and people will be less ready to trust each other in business.
If an enterprise doesn’t have a AAA rating and/or has defaulted on its debts, it is I think going to be in trouble.
I think we’ll see more internet based matches among the top players. I’d be willing to pay a few bucks to see Magnus, Vishy, Ivanchuk, and Topalov go at it. The games will be unrated at a faster time control with kibitzer comments by the players. Should be a lot of fun and a way for the players to make some decent money. The chess fan who predicts the most moves can play a blitz game against the winning GM.