Enter Your Reply

Chris comments:

'Maybe the real solution is to financially reward wins better than 2 draws.

What do you think?'

Yes, Chris, I agree, I mean, let's get real here. Money is a major factor for most professional chessplayers in determining the kind of play they will execute. Many chess spectators want to think everything a grandmaster does should be for the love of what they do. Maybe that's one reason why we don't have much of a sustainable professional chessplaying community in the United States. Financial rewards matter, as in any sport, whether you disperse them directly or indirectly. Tal's anecdote is about play being rewarded directly, for each game. My point system would have the same effect, but indirectly, insofar as the winners have to wait until the end of the tournament to be rewarded. Same thing though.

Even among amateurs, the financial incentives for playing in amateur tournaments can be a critical factor in determining how they will play the game. It's reflected in the point rewards system.

There are some major professional tournaments where additional factors are directly rewarded. I can't think of them off the top of my head. The effect is similar to contracts in football where players will be rewarded additional money for rushing so many yards or scoring so many touchdowns. Can you tell I'm a football fanatic? Baseball too.