I am GM, ELO 2616. I had similar thoughts, when I stopped my chess professional career at the age of 26 and switched to “normal” job. I am totally agree with Felix, just have to add that being chess professional player is not very good for your family life because of your constant absence.
Another thing that Felix might not have thought about is that the being a chess pro is not easy for non-super GMs anywhere, not just in Europe. For example, lots of indian GMs are probably trying to be the next Gukesh, Arjun. Pragg etc. A lot of them will never make it.
@@yuriydrozdovskyy5167 Thanks for your comment, Mr. Drozdovskij! Thanks for pointing out the family aspect, it's something I should have mentioned more seriously in the video. This is actually one of the biggest issues for professional chessplayers. I assume it's the same for all professions that require a lot of traveling though.
@yuriydrozdovskyy5167 I would imagine that many problems that 2600 players face could be solved in such a way that helps in the job market in areas involving software dev, database design and related areas. For instance, how about the problem of which opening to choose. Suppose you want to automate the task of choosing your next 4 to 5 moves (assuming your opponent stays mainstream and doesn't play something like Na3). This is a hugely complicated problem. You've got to consider your own record in each opening, your opponent's record in each opening, how drawish each opening is, the relative value of a draw versus a win. Being able to design solutions to this should be very marketable.
you dont have the carisma to make huge money like Nakamura or Botez Sisters. Today chess is over, the stream business is monopolized by Hikaru, Botez cocaine sisters, and other female (addressing no lifer losers gen z). I saw ex world champs streams with 50 viewers which is ridiculous but understandable because they can't entertain, dont speak, and they are not pretty female. That's it. Ah yes, consider also that chess is a dead game where a child can just memorize lines from engine and destroy you anytime.
Levy Rosman and anish Giri have both basically advised against a professional chess career. They both said the top 20 in the world do okay, but otherwise it’s going to be a struggle financially. It’s essential to hear this message bc it’s so easy to get caught up in the dopamine and the glamour of watching people on RUclips who have made it. But we don’t see the thousands of people who don’t make it. So I Ty and really appreciate you sharing your experience ❤
it's not a struggle financially if you stream. But the stream business is already over, you had to be present 8hours/day during pandemic, now it's over, monopolized by Cocaine Botez Sisters and Hikaru (and few others)
@@febloh There are some commonly held, false assumptions about some highly skilled positions in life. Number one is the belief that is something requires a great deal of skill is automatically *valuable*. Another false concept is the idea that people known to have high skills are alone at the top or rare humans. Lastly, that high skill and commitment towards an endeavor relate to money in any way at all. All of these are grossly inaccurate. Chess is a game... a GAME, and games are escapes from reality and not practical...not reality/not practical. 99.9% of the world think actually playing any kind of game is a waste of time that could be spent making money. There are more than 8 Billion people on the planet so at least ONE HUNDRED MILLION that could eventually play chess at top levels (at least Grandmaster). Why don't they? They know in every way It's a Game, not Work. Chess is not a career, it is not something in high demand, it is not contributing meaningfully to society, it is not even a contributor to life-skills. The idea that chess would give ANYONE a financial return is preposterous. Some do earn a meager living playing chess...so do people that solve Rubik cubes, so do people playing many games, but it is only a tiny proportion of the relatively tiny players trying to do it for money and their earnings are low, and not based in Chess, but actually in the entertainment value it provides...which is in exceptionally low demand relative to the population. It is not a job, it is not a career, it is not a financial venture, it is not a position considered of high value to the population.
i dont know about other countries, but in india if you are a professional chess player or have achieved a title be it a male or female candidate you are immediately given a "job" position at a govt corp. like railways or other industries . some big private co. also give you a permanent job , the player doesn't even have to show up to work most of the time just as long as they are actively playing in tournaments . Vishy anand sir, was wealthy when he started but Gukesh and prag , Vaishali were not but their communities folks and these corporations ( companies come only after title win ) helped them financially.
@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf the number of professional chess players is a very small number. Like 2,000 GMs which is 1 GM for every 4 million people on the planet. So I think practically everybody on the planet understands what you’re saying. ❤️
Good points and good video. I discovered a similar situation when I was trying to become a professional cyclist. I learned that the world just doesn’t need very many professional cyclists.
I am from Argentina. Najdorf was always an independent insurance agent. Panno is an engineer specialized in roads and communications, now retired and gives classes in River Plate. All have jobs here except Faustino Oro who lives from sponsors.
@@febloh yes, but that was also the pre-woke days where educations and reputations where eternal and you could return to building roads after 10 years of mainly playing chess. Now some 25 year old woke HR "specialists" would have to greenlight you if you dared drop off the corporate scene of a few months or years.
It's funny that you mention tennis. Basically anyone outside the top 200 is losing money (trying to) playing professionally. Lower ranked players trying to make it have to pay a lot of flights, hotels etc. In the lowest tier tournaments, of the ~60 players playing in a tournament, maybe the top 4 will leave without losing money. One injury can mean that your career is over and smaller injuries might reduce your income to zero for a decent stretch of time. Of course anyone inside the top 50 is making great money but being a lower ranked professional is extremely tough and the competition really hard. I think it's a general problem with individual sports, they are all very top heavy. Btw if you want to experience the great intersection of chess and tennis, come to the chess tennis masters in Vienna in August ;)
Thanks for your constructive comment, I didn't know that! As you said, it's a problem in all sports, might have forgotten to say that in the video. When's the event? Always wanted to participate 😁
@febloh I am an avid tennis spectator. This type of financial complaint is at least as common in the tennis community as in the chess community. The chess GMs have some advantages and some disadvantages over the top 200 players. Chess advantages: Tennis players can't give lessons remotely. There is far less demand for tennis books than chess books. Chess players generally have low expectations with regard to future earnings whereas tennis players, with dollar signs in their eyes, and egged on by their parents, often have unreasonable earnings expectations. Tennis advantages: The number of people who can earn a decent income from tennis is greater than in chess. Approx 150 in tennis versus 30 in chess. So you could say chess is 5 times as difficult. However, there is far more global interest in tennis than in chess so the competition might be more than 5 times as tough to make up for this. There may be more demand for tennis coaching than chess coaching.
@@paulepstein9739 Very nice analysis! Don't forget the chess advantage of earning by YT-channels or live-streaming, that's very difficult with tennis. And I like that one: "There is far less demand for tennis books than chess books" - very funny even though you've been serious. 😄😄
@@mranonymous8815 Glad you appreciated the post. On the tennis side, there are also some interesting avenues for those who can't survive on the prize money. I used to work for a major bookmaker and one of my colleagues was a 35 year old who had been ranked in singles in the 120 to 130 range -- yes, about the 125th best tennis player in the entire world! (Exact ranking withheld to preserve confidentiality). Since his peak was 120 to 130, his ranking may have been approx 300 when I knew him. He was on the team which set the odds for the tennis betting. Of course, this is an area of employment that is unavailable in chess -- chess betting is extremely rare.
@@mranonymous8815 and you don't have to be a top player in chess to become successful on YT/Twitch, just have to be enternaining/making headlines to make it your career
chess is just depressing as a whole Ive felt like giving up on chess and I cant imagine the stress especially of players with hard financial situations trying to make it big towards a FIDE title and becoming a grandmaster which just drains you altogether. the amount of people talking garbage about you and making you feel like your worth nothing just sucks and to be a professional I cant imagine how terrible it feels even when you win a game or an event its not over till its over which makes it hurts more. its a job that you know wont finish till your in the podium and its honestly heartbreaking to see how many players crumble when nearing the top or trying to get into the spotlight but simply collapsed and cant take the pressure anymore. i am still gonna aim for FM and hopefully if possible maybe I can become a GM even If I myself doubt it but as a career its really just depressing. glad you shared your story it really shows that chess is just not as exciting as its cut out to be but at least we have moments that make up for it regardless of our bad days and lets us sleep with a hope in our minds craving for happiness and a perfect day where you feel like your at the best and doing well..... thanks for hearing me out you are an amazing GM and we are all proud of you for telling us your journey and story
If chess is depressing, don't put effort into becoming a GM. Seriously. Your comment basically reads as "I hate chess. I think I might devote my life to it." Don't.
@@beeble2003 nah i like chess and would love to be a GM but the career aspect is simply stressful and hard if you are suffering financially. if I did have a dream goal it would be to become a strong American GM that's loves to play OTB blitz
Chess is not a career unless you attain popularity or have the connections to be a pro second. Take that wonderful brain of yours and apply it to building a skill.
I appreciate and applaud your courage to bring this to chess fans and the general public's attention. As an old old FIDE 2215 player from decades ago, I continue to follow the game. But as I grew up as a schoolboy during the Bobby Fischer craze (and regret that the focus in chess did not continue, especially here in the USA after 1972), it was very disheartening that chess fell back into game status. Yes, as stated below, chess appears to be in the 'artistic' realm, and much like a struggling but talent musician. The US has always been worse than Europe, unless you are extremely talented, young, and have financial backings from family and friends. Even now, we have several 2600-2700+ young players that only rarely play and pursue other careers, and play chess as a hobby.
Thank you for sharing your perspective! One small correction: Frederik did not get the money for the individual medal, this is the regular fee he gets for participating in the national team and it is paid by the German Chess Federation to every player through the sponsorship with UKA. The other members of the team received similar money, regardless of any individual performance. The same goes for the women's team, although they only get half of what the men get. And this also applies to participation in European Team events. And World Team Championships for Germany. In general the problem is that most federations simply do not care, because they do not suffer from bad conditions for the pros and in general just massively lack any ambition to improve the chess ecosystem, which is just such a pity.
Thanks for the correction!! You're absolutely right. There's not much ambition to improve things for the players, also because chessplayers are happy to get anything at all in many cases.
GM Elisabeth Pähtz talked about that as a guest on a TV show, that women get only half the money for participating. This is a FIDE chess tournament, not football, it's really crazy that in the german chess association such a rule still exists.
As a european (hungarian) hobby chess player and chess enthusiast, it is so sad to hear all these. We, in Hungary also feel a big decline in our chess world (after Maróczy, Portisch, Lékó, Polgár, Almási, Rapport, etc.).
Thank you for sharing your insight. I have a tremendous respect for the players and their sacrifices. Nobody has the answers but at least you’re not alone.
@micas099 I don’t have much time for small minded people like you. These players have sacrificed their childhood only to be broke with little prospect for upward mobility. Chess is a serious discipline that impacts each player differently. Some of which only reveal themselves later in life. Show a little respect.
That's being an artist for you. I remember Eric or Aman did a similar video on their channel a year or two ago and it was a much the same story for them (you're right though, that video is about the only other example I can think of). Even though your situation is difficult, to come as close to sustainable solvency in a creative field as you already have is a remarkable achievement and a testament to your discipline, determination, and mental strength. You have good reason to be proud of yourself; you are more genuinely and meaningfully successful than the millions of people who settled (or had to settle) for stable, secure, well paying jobs that have little or nothing to do with their real passions and interests. I hope you can find/create a solution that works to let you keep doing what you love even when you decide to take on the extra financial responsibility of starting a family. All the best.
@@stello61 You're correct. I went to college, got a degree in engineering, make a lot of money, and work from home. If I was unhappy with my situation, I'd change it. Nobody is going to fix the problem for Felix other than Felix.
I feel in my country (India) we don't have as many sports achievements as most European countries (who win multiple gold medals at every Olympics) which is why we celebrate the wins which are few and far in between grandly and give out massive cash prizes.
Haven't thought about it like that, would have to look into the statistics. I also had the feeling, that Indians specifically, are more patriotic, compared to european countries. Apart from that, you guys just appreciate everything much more than Europeans (unfortunately) do, please correct me if I'm wrong.
India people are athletically weaker and slower than Europeans and Africans, hence any sport that requires any physical ability they are very poor at in comparison. It’s the reason they are good at cricket as this involves very little athleticism…it’s more a game of technique.
@@febloh True Indians are very patriotic but that's partly because it's a developing country where things are improving constantly and more and more achievements are coming. Europe is already rich and stagnating so you guys don't really care much anymore. As for chess, thankfully Indian government funds chess well e.g paying a salary to all grandmasters and giving them a government job. On the other hand, physical sports other than cricket are not funded at all, which is partly why we are so bad at olympics sports compared to Europe.
@@ym276Yeah, India can do well in Olympics if gov selects and supports sports persons well. So many talents couldn't go to Olympics because of lack of support or knowledge.. Many people don't know how to get selected for National sports or international competitions..
An American here. Europe seems to be one of the nicest areas to be a professional chess player in to me. Apart from a country like India, which funds chess from government and private sectors, Europe seems to have the best consistency and quality when it comes to organizing chess events.
The government thing is absolutely new here, where government actually needs to fund and build facilities is for our Olympic athletes, but the short-sightedness and ever chasing short term votebank politics will never lead to that. It's always about the low hanging fruits here...
Thanks for talking about these sorts of topics that are often swept under the rug, it really gives people a window into the struggles of the chess world. I started playing when I was 17 in high school (about to be 5 years ago februrary) and I'm 100% self taught and just started playing OTB last year february and I'm now around 1900. For context I'm canadian and I haven't played many OTB tournaments due to opportunity but I'd love to make chess work somehow but I'm under no illusion that i'd be the best in the world or anything like that to be anywhere close to financially stable off chess alone, but I've dedicated a lot of time to the game would like to make it work as a career, even if it'd be coaching. I live with my parents right now so I don't have too many financial struggles or anything but I'm about to graduate from university this year and things are going to move quick after that I imagine. Do you have any advice for me? I'm for sure interested in pushing for a title, probably NM or CM at the very least, but I'm not sure how I should go about it. Should I begin coaching before getting a title? If so, how? I tried applying for chesscon coaching but they basically flipped me off and I don't see why anyone would want coaching from a 1900 when there's infinite titled players who charge dirt cheap prices. Sorry if this is all over the place, I tried getting out the important points to give you enough info while being respectful of your time. If you have any advice at all please feel free to tell me. Be it to suggest to work extra hard this year or drop it all together, I'm all ears. Thanks a ton
you've started too late by any definition to join the ranks of "make a living on the chess circuit". That doesn't mean you shouldn't pursue your passions of course, if competitive chess is one of them. Do keep in mind that if you make GM out of this starting point you might be just the 2nd or 3rd person in world history that made it! The "obvious" advice is to develop your chess business, ie coaching, perhaps "content creation", perhaps "organizer" (you know, where you collect entry fees from 100 players and hope by the end of the tournament some of the fees are your profit), and anything else you can imagine, chess lobbyist, whatever. Coaching is a "people business" and a certain magic touch can take you much further than rating and titles. But really all this is the Plan B, the Plan A is to do something with your education that allows you to pay bills without robbing you of all your free time and energy. Just to leave you with some euro-imagery, before the current crop of 16 year olds in the world's top 30, we had a kind of chess pro that was 30 or older, and in order to continue living the dream of going to tournaments and compete for cash prizes, they were living the "van life", going from tournament to tournament in a camper or couchsurfing and so on and so on. This was possible and desirable in select few locations, for example in southern Spain where there's one tournament after the other along the coast, or somewhere between Serbia/Croatia, Czech and Hungary. So yeah, if you want a lot of chess you might need the van life, and in fact the van life in Europe!
@@germank7924 Thanks for the thought provoking response! Yeah I'm definitely not having delusions of grandeur that I'll be an IM or GM, and definitely nowhere near that anytime soon, especially while having to support myself. But you're probably right that the best approach is to just keep perusing it as my passion while finding a job to keep me satisfied in the mean time with my degree and work on building up content/coaching/organizing on the side and seeing if I can turn that into anything substantial. You're definitely right that coaching is a people business more than anything, tough part is I'm not as good of a people person as I should be Lol, guess it's something I'll have to hone in on eventually. I don't see myself living the van life anytime soon, I don't think my girlfriend would be too happy... Lol. But I think I'll give competitive a little more of a shot to push hard and get a low title hopefully within the next year. Then work on my getting myself a stable income and building a coaching resume and only then maybe think about having one more go at competitive chess if I still have it in me at that time. Cheers and thanks again for the thoughtful comment!
Reality check. A rating of 1900 is a personal achievement to be proud of but you're 500 points behind an International Master, meaning that you'd be expected to score a little over 5% in games against minimum-rating IMs. You'd expect to score about 3% against minimum-rated GMs. If a tournament has prizes big enough to make a living from, there will be IMs and GMs playing, so you are not going to win those prizes. You're not good enough to make a living from _playing_ chess. 1900 says "I'm good at chess and it's my main hobby", not "professional player". I don't know much about coaching or YouTubing, so take the rest of what I say with a pinch of salt. People probably want to be coached by somebody considerably better than themselves, so that would limit your market to people with ratings a good chunk below 1900. Is there enough of a market there? Sure, there are lots of players down there, but they're mostly just playing for fun, so do they want a coach? Is coaching in schools an option? (But, even if it is, you can only do five after-school chess clubs a week, which is 5-10hrs work per week, and schools don't have the money to pay you a day's wages for 1-2hrs work. And usually one of the teachers is good enough to coach the school team for free.) RUclips looks pretty crowded, to me. Again, there are plenty of popular IMs and GMs on RUclips. You can't compete with them on chess quality, so you need some other way of attracting people to your channel versus theirs.
@@beeble2003 I think you misunderstood my comment a bit, I'm under no illusion that I'm GM or IM material. I've played OTB for under a year and I'm 1900 with limited amount of tournaments, online I'm anywhere from 2400-2600, not that that's really anything to write home about but just adding context. I've beaten plenty of IMs and GMs online and unfortunately have thrown so many completely winning games against them OTB, which is all to say I can hold my own sometimes and if I don't buckle under pressure I can grab some wins here and there. I don't think 1900 is my peak, otherwise I wouldn't even consider pursuing chess competitively. Here tournaments other than huge tournaments like zonals have at best ~$500 prizes for first and ~$100 entries. Usually theres a 2300 slavic folk who just mops the floor with everyone and theres the occasional IM so you'e definitely right that the prize money just isn't there. Just to reiterate I never suggested, nor would, that as a 1900 I'm a professional chess player, obviously that goes without saying. I tend to agree with you in that most players basically want player stronger than themselves (most often a titled player) regardless of teaching ability. I'd thrive on teaching ambitious students but those are few and far between unfortunately and why should they want my coaching over a titled player who barely teaches anything but has a title and charges dirt cheap. The only other approach would be to garner an audience from, like you said, a crowded space like youtube that has no shortage of shoving courses and books and lessons down your throat. It sucks but it is what it is. As for OTB lessons and such, unfortunately where I live theres very few chess clubs and most are unfeasibly far to hold as a regular job and like you said even if I picked up 5 hours here and there it's not going to be sustainable. I pitched a chess program to my local community center a few years back but because of corona they had to call it off which was unfortunate. I have hope for the future that money will start coming into chess and there'll be a rise in eyes on it and newcomers willing to learn, unfortunately that doesn't seem like it's in the near future so from all the advice I got I'm pursuing it on the back burner for now so I don't sabotage my future self by hoping. I appreciate the feedback 👌
Find a group of kids to teach chess to. Then slowly expand from there by word of mouth to the friends of those parents. It’s gonna suck but kids is where the money is at for chess and parents are willing to pay $50 to $100 per hour for in person lessons. Many parents have a strong desire in this day and age to get their kids AWAY from the computer screens. Having a title or not doesn’t really matter for these parents either - they just want their kids to learn. Of course if your students hits like 1700 in rating then you can refer them to a master or someone stronger than you.
Felix, thanks for sharing those insights and especially your transparency! From my point of view, if by the age of around 15 to 18 it is not obvious that you do have a realistic chance to make it into the like top 50 or so, you simply need to have a plan B. For example, you do go to university and start producing chess content on the side. Even if it is going to take you twice as long to finish your university studies, you do, at least, have a fall back. I also don't think that chess coaching is having to much of a promising future. I'm convinced that within the next couple of years we will see some chess AI which you simply feed with your games and said AI will point out your weaknesses and deficits and suggest a training plan. I wouldn't be surprised, seeing such a tool being offered by the usual suspects in the online chess market.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Felix. I do a lot of chess related things with coaching and organising tournaments. I hold a NI title with FIDE and I am a National Arbiter with FIDE. These "side jobs" bring in a little bit of money for me but I am in no way in any position to quit my day job for chess - I love chess and I completely sympathise with your all of your concerns about the state of professional chess. If I was ever to want to do this full-time I would struggle financially, would need to coach and tournament organise everyday for work that many other chess players would consider to be "just a hobby" and give a little amount for all your time and effort. If I did this full-time I would feel aggrieved that in doing all of these things I would end up hating the game and would have no time to ever improve my own game.
Thank you for sharing your insights! I am nowhere near your strength, but I grew up playing chess, tried out tournaments in my early 20s, and was able to cobble together a living as a decent National Master in the United States (just under 2300 FIDE). But it is not a comfortable living and I accepted this going into it. I managed for a few years, but felt burned out from playing multiple weekend and weekday events every month, plus teaching after school programs and private lessons was the only way to make a living (as you mentioned, the biggest loss was travel expenses and for me entry fees). If I had stuck around longer, I might have been able to take advantage of the chess boom during the pandemic, and gotten into streaming, content creation etc. but I am happy with what I accomplished in a few years, as my main goal was to improve and enjoy the game. but I definitely saw a lot of much more talented players than myself who probably could have gone on to become IM/GM but left the game because they couldn't make a sustainable living.
Finally, I also thought that maybe being blitz/rapid good instead of classical good is more economically advantageous because tournaments are shorter so overall stay is cheaper 😞
it sucks, and you are young. Try to imagine how really, really bad it is going to suck when you turn fifty. I once talked to an older GM trying to make money on the open tournament circuit in the eastern half of EU. The guy was miserable to an absurd degree. I drew him, it was a success for me for a moment, and then I started thinking I should have thrown the game to him. Little to no money, no friends or family I think, and the game he loved when he was younger turned into a torture tool. For retirement, I have no clue what he was doing. Next station homeless shelter Duras once defeated Schlechter in a tournament (Hamburg 1910? I think) and Schlechter had a nervous breakdown, crying that he needs the prize money to feed himself. Duras threw a game to a non-entity in the next-to-last round, making sure that Schlechter won the tournament. Schlechter died of hunger in Vienna in 1918 anyway
Two stories which are sad and a good and often occurring example. Fortunately, no one in Europe will end up like Schlechter, but you made a good point.
This is not meant to be an insult, and I don’t think you are, but the issue boils somewhat down to entitlement. in the end, one has to realize that chess is just a game. Professional gaming is only a reality in highly industrialized economies (or prestige-seeking nations) because it depends on a body of ordinary people with enough income and leisure time to consume the game. Because in itself chess doesn’t generate economic (but I concede cultural) value, it’s in essence a service that fills the free time of workers. Look how many content creators and players so desperately try to construct an economy around the game to generate as much income as possible, content creation, education, apps. But the reality, compared to soccer, for instance, is that chess is not marketable enough in terms of attire, ticketing, exposure and sponsorship to sustain a living for all players. It’s not meant to be that way, and if you want it that way, the professionals need to construct this environment themselves, and the harsh reality in this economy is, that effort and success are not causally linked, but their definition is highly subjected to money. I agree with other commentators that the situation is similar for athletes across the board. Look at the participants at the Olympic Games for instance
Thanks for your very constructive comment! You're absolutely right, I guess everyone in their niche wants better conditions - often unjustifiably so. Thanks for giving me your opinion, I'll think a lot about it!!
@@febloh I know you offer coaching but what about the market in this area and for chess teachers in schools? I would think students want their coaches to be as strong as possible and you may be underselling yourself in terms of your achievements. You are 22 years old? Maybe find out how many people under 23 have a higher rating than you and market yourself as Xth best under-23 GM in the world. I used to have professional chess coaching but I lost my job and so can't afford it any more.
@@paulepstein9739 Maybe.. Not sure, that a young age of the coach is something which is necessarily attracting students, since I'd assume most people are looking for experience in a Trainer. (Which I have 17 years of, but still..😅) It's a great thought though, I'll definitely keep it in mind. Thank you!!
you defuse your own argument. why are soccer players entitled to earn millions why chess players on the same international level can barely get by? maybe the chess institutions should draw some money in? they could and they should. the failure is neither in the sport itself nor in the players.
I think the situation is broadly similar for all sports. Even in the huge global sports like tennis and golf, those outside the top 150 or so struggle to make a decent living. With other less popular sports like badminton, snooker, darts, biathlon etc, the situation is just as bad if not worse than chess.
True. The way I see it though, is that in chess even if you're in the Top 100, in some cases even Top 50, playing alone is still not a reliable source of income. Nevertheless your argument is still very good and in the future I'll be more careful comparing chess to other sports. Thanks for your constructive input!!
@@febloh It's not just chess. In Academia, all but the very best academicians and researchers also have to teach multiple classes and have office hours. This could more so be seen as a failure of parenting since they push their kids to focus all their attention on a board game. I imagine the parents like having a prodigy-like child to brag about, instead of instilling wisdom about how to actually make a living. Unless the kid is a generational talent, it is either the fault of the parents for the aforementioned reason, or the fault of the chess player that refuses to think they should have to do more than move wooden pieces to make a living.
Its also similar for artists, e.g. piano players, dancers. Devoting their youth to the subject as prodigys translate into a good income as an adult only if they have very exceptional solo careers with audiences paying or if they get long-term employed by an orchestra/dance company in main roles, or as a coach. My ex wife is an East Germany "state trained" ballet dancer but in her late teens she dropped out because competition for becoming a ballerina was too hard/the body developed slightly less advantageous for that. Although she was extremely good. Concerning government support this is only/mainly common in rather centralistic states (formerly socialistic) and not really in the western liberal market model. So in the end the only way seems to be to market yourself as coach, content provider, go into chess-niches if possible. Or switch fields using the exceptional chess skill as a "proof" of very strong analytical abilities (like a maths PhD - here the concrete content also is only rarely really relevant on the later job): Some players worked e.g. for finance or strategy consulting firms - but this would be a career outside of chess. Currently there is a need of young talents due to demographics.
@@derekluna7700 "In Academia, all but the very best academicians and researchers also have to teach multiple classes and have office hours." Teaching is a fundamental part of being an academic, so I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, here.
I'm old enough to remember Evgeny Sveshnikov talking about this in the 80s or 90s. He campaigned quite hard (but unsuccessfully) to achieve a much fairer package for professional players. His idea was to allow games to be copyrighted to the two players involved. Consequently, any time a game was shown in mass media, like magazines, books, databases, video streams etc. the players received a small fee, or royalty, much as music artists do when their works are broadcast on tv, radio etc. This steady trickle of royalties from each published game, in combination with traditional prize money, would, he argued, keep professional players financially buoyant. Dealing with retirement, he suggested that only the player, or his/her authorized representative would be able to publish their own 'Best Games' book. As things stood, he felt it was morally corrupt that some random outsider can take a player's lifetime of creative output, and use it to generate sales that only they and their publisher benefit from.
Yes I've heard about that too. A really creative proposal by the Legend. It's somewhat forgotten now and will most likely never be discussed any time soon (maybe ever) again unfortunately.
Great video as always, making money playing chess of course is a tough task, but I didn't realize how much contrast there is between Europe and Asia for chess players, 3k for a gold medal at the Olympiad is insulting, that's like a 2nd place in Menorca or Ellobregat open.
Hello Felix ! So the world goes on... Maybe one of the solution to continue to be a chess professional is creating a community who can help you with a "montly cagnotte"? First, for your chess career, second to have the privilege of sharing your games. But it's difficult i suppose ! It s a pleasure to follow you.
Commenting for engagement. I hope for our top chess players to live comfortably so they can perform their sport at their highest level, without distraction or reservation. That should be the goal of any sports organization.
One word that would solve most of these issues....Qualifiers. Why is it that we have all these elite tournaments and 1 million amateurs willing to pay subscriptions...connec the dots and realize that if the chess organizers had around the clock online qualification tournaments then you would have a whole new area of chess sponsorship. Why is it that poker is so much more lucrative than chess ? Simple answer....there are qualification tournaments where the only prize is a ticket to the big event and the money is used to build the prize pools. Also this opens the door to raising money from the crowd of amateur players. As it stands you have to give a big percentage of open prizes to the class players. They would happily pay for qualification EF to prestigious events...even throw in hotel and airfare and you would still have a big extra pool of cash.
Great input! One issue which poker doesn't affect though, is cheating. If you organize that many events, it's gonna be really hard to have anti cheating measures in all of those events I assume - it would be possible though. Still, I really like the idea!
But with poker, the weaker players can qualify for bigger events and if they qualify for the main event, they actually have a chance of winning. In chess, the weaker players would have zero chance of making it through the qualifiers and the strong players who do qualify would just get beaten up by the stronger players anyway.
@@andy4226uk Right, but people shell out money a lot more stupid things in life than say the opportunity to play their chess gods. Also what if they could consult a computer or GM 2-3 times in the game ? The Chess world suffers from a serious lack of imagination and relies on this model of depending on a monopoly man to finance the whole thing.
You can‘t compare poker and chess in this case, a huge part of poker is variance which allows an amateur to do better than a pro quite regularly, the exact opposite in chess. Subscriptions work because you play people around your level and you can actively track your progress. There‘s no way I‘m paying $50 dollars for a weekly qualifier just to get absolutely smashed by titled players every game.
GM Drozdovkij and GM Blohberger, thanks for sharing. It might not seem much but the chess playing world respects your accomplishments. I hope for a better future for chess professionals because it takes a lifetime of effort, especially in your formative years to reach the echelon.
If it's merely an issue of marketing then the onus is on the individual players to multitask and stretch themselves thin to become great players and build a brand around their likeness. Similar to any other abnormal career choice (think artist, professional skateboarder, etc.) very few achieve financial liberty. Chess doesn't have the financial backing or demand that more popular sports have and it's a shame, but on the other hand we sit on the shoulders of giants and if it isn't this generation that can survive purely off of chess then maybe its the next one. Very insightful video and good luck in your journey!
Tennis players complain about similar problems. If you're not Top Ten and winning tournaments you're still a pro but don't earn enough compared to a normal job and have to scrape by with residencies and coaching lessons. Of course the prize money is much higher in tennis, but so are the costs and the health issues.
While that may be true for the number 250 in tennis, it certainly isnt for top 100 players that consistently make the main draw of grand slams. For example rus (ned) whose peak rating is 41 in the world and for most of her career has been somewhere between place 90-150 in the rankings, and for a good few years even lower, has 4 million dollars in career earnings so far, without actually performing at grand slams and without major titles. in the womens game where theres less money than in the mens game. So saying you cant make a living outside the top 10 in tennis is such a wild statement. A very average tennis player is earning what the top chess players are in prize money, not taking sponsorships into account
@@jimfeyenoord01 rudned has been world number 2 and won 12 atp tournaments, he is a top pro in tennis, of course he has made a bunch of money. you also have to deduct coach salary, physio salary, flights, housing, manager, equipment, pr agency and taxes from that earnings. tennis players outside the top 100 often complain that the costs are very high as well. there is various stories about tennis players barely getting by and having a lot of pressure. even at the top some players have burnt out - mardy fish, osaka, borg retiring at 26, etc etc - the pressure in tennis is huge - only a few are at the very top. the same applies to most individual sports like surfing, sailing, snooker, table tennis - there is tens of thousands of very good players worldwide competing for the titles - and obviously not everyone will get sponsored or get the titles.
Hallo Felix. Sehr gutes und offenes Video mit den verschiedenen Themen. Ich wünsche Dir auf deinem Weg weiterhin viel Erfolg und viele gute und interessante Partie und hoffe doch, dass Du dein Elo Rating verbessern kannst. Beste Grüsse aus der Schweiz, Stefan
I have often thought about how the calculus of playing (non-elite) tournaments for money and whatnot simply can't make financial sense. Seemingly even with a win, you might not cover your expenses. And, even if you're always the strongest player at a tournament and have a good chance of winning, sometimes you slip up and maybe lose a game or make one draw too many, and someone has a great tournament and beats you, and you're down money for the whole tournament. Even if you win, you're living in constant financial stress, and mostly just playing against weaker players, which certainly won't help with reaching elite level! Really enjoyed the video, I really like this sort of thing where it's just a person relating their unique experience and perspective in a relatively neutral, non-dramatic fashion. So much of chess content is aimed at teenagers who don't care for a balanced view, everything has to happen within 30 seconds so they don't lose interest, etc. Good luck with your chess!
And the situation today is much better than it was 40 years ago. Back then, I was the same age as you are today and I was also an ambitious young chess player who hoped to make a living from playing chess. Back then there was no internet and no online chess, there were no tournaments on the internet and the few chess professionals were either top ten or poorly paid. Then you just had to make the logical decision to learn another profession, in my case it was EDV (today it's called IT) and I was very happy with this decision, I had a great job, I had lots of great colleagues and a very good salary. And I think everyone who can't turn their hobby into a career should still make that decision today, it's not a given. For example, I could also play the piano quite well, but earning money as a piano player in the classical field is definitely even harder than earning money as a chess player. There are far too many top-class players who play better than me anyway and who don't earn much either. That's just the way life is. You can't make the mistake of holding on to it by force. Don't make chess your profession, make it your hobby and you'll be happy.
Firstly thank you for sharing your perspective of being a chess player. I think that what you're saying is definitely true and things need to improve as the money put into it is appalling. You can't make a living as a chess player and have to do other things to even maintain a normal standard of living if you're not in the top 1%. Hopefully chess will start improving itself and making itself more appealing to more people so more money can be put into it hopefully!
Dear Felix, thank you for the video. I hope most viewers know the drill, if you like to support your content creator: watch the video from start to finish, leave a thumbs up and a comment. That way YT algo picks it up and presents it to more people. IMHO coaching as it once used to be is dead. There are so many books, videos, courses that real 1:1 lessons are rarely needed or only needed for the super super serious students. In Triathlon Ironman makes a huge amount of money from their agegroupers, who are basically paying the money for the pros by paying their entry fees. But still same thing, unless you are not in the top 10 it is a tough financial situation. I really do hope that chess will become mandatory in schools that would create lots of chess jobs, if those are not also taken by AI as so many many other jobs will be. I follow you pretty much from the beginning and will also Subscribe +, once you are monetized. BTW also stream live, here and on twitch, would be additional income once their requirements are met. Yours, Jan
Hi Felix, good to see you again! Are you planning to focus on content creation? Regarding professional playing, I don’t think we can expect anything to change in the upcoming decades, if ever. The top players always will earn exceptionally well, the top 50 will make some decent money, and the rest must focus on everything else in chess except playing or choose another profession. I’m pretty sure this applies to other sports as well and chess is not unique. You can make a good living by doing chess courses, coaching students, and, on top of everything, adapting to the rapidly changing chess world by creating content that will also influence your non-playing income. You’re popular, you earn more - it’s just how it is. Nowadays, non-elite grandmasters rarely play in open tournaments to earn a living-usually, they’re there just to spend some quality time in a different environment, to socialize but clearly not to earn serious money. Sadly, there are also those who are unwilling to adapt to the reality of today.
Hey Arturs! Yes, I'm planning to pursue it, really have been enjoying it so far:) You summarized everything perfectly. Especially the point that in other sports it's not any better is something I underestimated honestly. The main point is that players need to adapt, you hit the nail in the coffin with that!
You need to understand something Felix - the countries that give substantial money to chess players (Uzbekistan, India, etc.) also happen to be the poor countries. US, Germany do not, because it’s a free economy and chess do not contribute to it.
The problem of chess watchability isn't learning the rules. I'm confident that the rules of soccer are more complicated. The problem is that you have to be quite skilled in it yourself to understand what's going on. Not so much with soccer.
This is just true in most sports. Just go look at all the small olympic sports: Even people in the top 30 are either from a very poor country, have some strange university support, or are outright rich. It's no surprise than Levy or the Botez sisters out-earn most tournament players: Their ads bring more money. There's not enough money in chess. Not enough people watch, and something like a clothes advertisement isn't bringing anything. Being a professional chess player is just a much worse choice, on average, than dedicating the effort to something that actually pays well. Imagine instead of a chess player, you wanted to just wanted to play a videogame for a living: say, Super Metroid. You aren't going to make it there without twitch and tips, and there might not be money for mode than 6 people doing that at all. You are in the entertainment industry either way.
Same reasons i gave up at 16 after 10+ years of practicing and learning and focused on other things. I loved it, it was a lot of fun, will never forget the first tournament and win, but it was clear that it's a path i can't continue without a background support 🙏 So many years later and seemingly nothing changed, that's indeed depressing - i hope it'll change in the future, this sport/hobby is something very-very special and definitely should be supported more in Europe!
Hallo Felix, ich weis nicht ob du dich an mich erinnern kannst ich bin stolz auf dich wir kennen uns noch von früher bei Harald dem Trainer als wir 12-13 waren
In Japan where I live, the incentive structure of one of the most well-known national sports, sumo wrestling, is similar to chess. There are so many levels, and unless you're in the top two or three tiers and get to play/fight in front of large crowds, there isn't much money in pursuing the sport. Worse yet, in sumo, it's a long and arduous physical journey to even get to a competitive level, involving things like serving your seniors in the sumo stable like a servant, engaging in daily training bouts which are gruelling and can often lead to borderline abuse, and following a diet that while beneficial to a career in sumo has been proven to reduce average lifespans by almost 10 years due to poor cardiovascular health outcomes. By comparison, chess players have it easy -- you have a long career in the game (even after your playing days end, you can pursue a livelihood as a second or a coach if you stay in touch with the modern developments in opening theory and so on), you have an online presence now with the potential of a global audience and the relative lack of a language barrier.
It's been a while! I play chess because I love it, but I never really think of becoming professional as it means becoming a coach, and it doesn't appeal to me. This is a very good!!
Ein interessantes Thema. Es ist wirklich schwierig, dem Lebensstandard mit der regionalen Vergütung als Profispieler gerecht zu werden. Problematisch ist auch das Alter, bis zu welchem man spielen kann. Ich denke, dass hier insbesondere der Weg vieler Spieler, wie auch bei dir vermutlich, im Streaming und Content-Bereich tätig zu sein lukrativer sein dürfte, sobald sich die Basis aufgebaut hat.
Hab ich mir auch gedacht, das Alter ist bei anderen Sportarten aber in meinen Augen sogar ein noch größeres Problem, vor allem wegen frühzeitigen Verletzung. Schach kann man doch im Durchschnitt wahrscheinlich länger noch auf Top-Niveau spielen (Anand,Gelfand,...) Danke auch, dass der Content-Bereich in der Zukunft sehr viele Möglichkeiten bietet. Danke dir für deinen konstruktiven Kommentar!! 😊
In the west, the attitude is that sports players should only get paid what money they can bring in through ticket sales, TV contracts, endorsements, etc. The government may support some things like the olympic teams, but only at a basic level - training and travel but no salary. In the west, you need to find a way to monetize it or maybe get some private benefactors to help out.
If you're not realistically going to be 2700, it seems like you have to either A) get another job, B) become a content creator and offer other chess-related services. You seem to be doing the latter reasonably well so keep up the good work!
Even if you are 2700, it's not good enough to make a career purely from playing chess. E.g Guys like Shankland have to do lots of simuls, coaching and lessons
My favourite chess player was Jonathan Penrose, who despite being the best British player of his generation (ten times British Champion) didn’t need much convincing that there was no living to be had from chess. In those days, we were jealous of the Soviet grandmasters who were supported by the state and could play full-time. But we also knew that such a life was double-edged. Thus, Jonathan spent his entire working life as a university lecturer in psychology. (I remain forever grateful to Jonathan and to chess for being my excuse for meeting his brother, Nobel-prize winning physicist Roger Penrose. Roger delighted in telling me that Jonathan was far and away the cleverest of the three brothers, with Oliver second and Roger third. Quite a family!).
Good video! I would add that a chess career normally finishing at around 35-40 max - and then what? In the end, I feel that becoming a GM at a young age should be the goal as a personal accomplishment - get your university degree at the same time and then enjoy a traditional working and family life.
Thank you, Mr. Rahal! True, but I guess you could say the same about physical sports, where the career ends even earlier in most cases. One should definitely consider seeing Chess just as a hobby though, agree.
@@febloh @febloh Felix I personally think that most people in sports that are able to extend their career after up till 35-40 get paid exceptionally well to sustain their lives afterwards in a case of chess most after their primes struggle with life in general I would recommend you watching video of "hometown chess hero" he is one of the people that reacted to your this video and hear his opinion on the matter
I've been playing for four years. My rating has been climbing pretty steadily at 100 points per year. I'm already at 1200, and though there's no assurance that in sixteen more years I'll reach 2800, I think I owe it to myself to give it my best try.
I think this is the case for most sports. Take handball a reasonably popular sport. There are very few players that can make a living on playing handball. Probably only players in the top leagues. Those are the leagues in Germany, France and Spain. Perhaps also in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Hungary (but I doubt that all players in these leagues can make a living of playing). In most video games it is impossible to make a living off playing. Only games I can think of are Dota, Counter-Strike and League of Legends but it is only a tiny percentage of players. Most players that are on professional level have to make a living off coaching and/or content creation. It's a general problem for "smaller" sports, and especially games, in the west. If you'd ask me, I think this is a consequence of how people are "overworked" in the west and don't have time to develop interests in different sports or games. Most people just watch football, or any other of the major sports and don't usually enjoy "games" (board- or videogames). In return public interest is low for these niche games (chess is one of them) and capitalists don't want to sponsor a sport that will not generate revenue (since public interest is low). We live in a predatory society, so as long as capitalists can't make a profit, these games/sports will not survive.
What do you think of Magnus and Hikaru efforts to change chess? They want it to be more economical for players. Quicker time formats, esport direction, freestyle chess more exiting and dynamic etc. What is your thoughts? A video about that perhaps?
Thanks for this vid. I think the main problem are those who can hardly live from chess but don't stop trying (and yes you have this kind of guys in lots of other sports). To be honest I'd be absolutely fine if nobody could live from chess because there are so many lost souls that are trying hard but don't manage to. It becomes even more of a problem when they are getting old. This wouldn't be happening if anybody knew that this is a mere hobby and nothing else. I am doing chess composition and everyone out there knows that he or she will never make a living from composing and solving and everyone you meet is just full of dedication.
magnus is marketing chess differently now with take take take, and the whole streaming set-up allows for fast paced games with commentary on top like a any other sport (soccer/basketball etc). this will surely only continue to increase in popularity and revenue in the next 5-10 years, so try to see how you can capitalise on this. good luck!
Nice video. Let me add that Chess is an extremely narrow game. dedicating your life to that is insane. I used to be a pro-poker player, between IT contracts, and the glamour of being a pro soon evaporates, when you play kinda full-time. In my case, It was not a big risk, because, if I were to run bad, I could just go to the next contract. Which I would do anyway, as, after a break, it would be fun to do that, more than the game.
@@febloh Yes, poker has declined, the golden age was the circa the Noughties, and the Chris Moneymaker boom. Now, everyone is too good at it for it to be a good living. It's fun as a hobby, of course, if you're not trying to pay the bills. (And, online, AI bots are a huge problem, also). I've heard it said of golf too. When paying your mortgage depends on playing great, the fun goes out of it, it's stress. I guess it's the same with most games and sports, when you're having to succeed, or you're doomed.
As a kid, I briefly took lessons from a former tennis pro who peaked somewhere near the top 200-100. He had to quit playing because he was struggling to make minimum wage. I think this is a problem in most sports outside of, say, football, basketball, etc., which have massive global fanbases.
I'd say the elefant in the room is where the money is supposed to come from. Either chess (as a form of entertainment for viewers) has to generate the money or sponsors have to provide it. In either case, average middle european salaries for lets say all 2650+ players seems almost impossible to allocate. I feel like the "more rapid and blitz" angle makes sence, but even the most optimistic version of this would still be orders of magnitude bellow the needed funds.
Very good and important video that shows how the priorities are set in Most of the EU Countrys. Instead of support this wonderful sport and present it as a role model for the young people, you hear practically nothing in the media about the brilliant players we have.
Thanks for this video I think this video is very important to show to younger player or people who want to get into chess as a career it is extremely hard to make money with it unless you are in the top of the top or living in certain countries chances to make money to survive on is very low problem what I find about chess being considered as a Sports I would classify it as a mind game players in other sports usually if you are a professional you can make a living playing the game but chess that is not the case many players even Gms need to do coaching or make online chessable courses to play the bills the fact that someone is a professional in a field and cannot make a living with it I find that something is wrong with how chess is run cause if your a professional at the game you should be able to make a living with it.
Hi, move to Cape Town South Africa. Cost of living much less expensive. It is a beautiful city with a very strong chess culture. You will be able to make a decent living from coaching. Most of the SA Olympiad team lives in Cape Town as well.
I see your point, but I think it's important to consider that most tournaments are held in Europe, which makes it much easier for Europeans to attend especially since the cost is relatively low for them. But for someone from countries like China or India, the cost of international travel can be prohibitive, not to mention the visa fees and other expenses. Also, words like "nerd" or "geek" are often seen as negative or embarrassing in Europe and North America, but in many Asian cultures, similar terms are actually considered flattering and a sign of respect for someone's intellect. I'm from Sri Lanka, and I follow Indian chess closely. For example, the Indian chess Olympic team received US$836,000 in gift from their government. Players like Gukesh have benefited from tax exemption for his world championship prize money and received substantial financial backing, with his state government giving him $625K. Even his high school gifted him an e-class Benz.
Nice video. The problem, like you mentioned, is the recognition of chess. It's supply and demand. If there was a pay TV deal for chess worth billions, chess players would earn more. I would say despite the tradition and cultural influence of chess the interest level of the general population is closer to something "fringe" like Magic the Gathering than to tennis. Tennis and golf, two sports where the top can live off prize money suffers a similar fate like chess if you go down the totem pole. Players outside the elite level will absolutely make their living as coaches. The ecosystem supports more pure players but at some point there's a cutoff. If you think about some other sports, there's not even the coaching option as that's most lucrative for individual sports. At least chess is in a pretty good position here because coaching can happen online and there's a decent pool of people who want to improve at the game. I do agree that coaching rates in Europe are surprisingly low. Unfortunately chess in it's typical tournament form is rather boring to normal viewers. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed the candidates and world championship but "3-6h for a draw" is not a great pitch. I completely agree with you that rapid and blitz is the way to go. Sadly, 30k is not sustainable. You should consider other options. The GM title is at least a cultural benefit when it comes to job seeking (in the U.S. a GM title is often a good way to get into elite universities as well). I think you should at least think about the option of another career or maybe devote some of your time to go in that direction (Fernuni etc.). At least consider a half-time job and reduce chess by 50%.
One thing I need to say... Right on the first minutes you say.. "chess career"...it might already be a missunderstanding of what career means. Career is the development of a professional expertise while exercising something for which "someone" is willing to pay for. Most careers are service oriented. Which means you exchange something that you can do well against a payment that someone would be willing to pay for. It is very important to understand this.. chess itself is not a career. It is just a challenging game that people play. Anything that involves making it into a career you will see that the monetary value is only based on what people are willing to pay to watch. Sports requiring a lower level of IQ which are just physical like football have a larger audience and pay more for that reason. Hence the real issue is the marketability and audience. Also unlike other sports, people are only interested to know who is the strongest player. They are not interested to know who is stronger. This path is certainly the toughest and most gruelling and life consuming endeavour that exists...and potentially the least rewarding. Regarding country recognition: this is strongly tied to nationalism. Europe is basically an agglomerate of many countries..
I don't see how your last sentence makes sense (connecting to the sentence that came before). Europe is an agglomerate of many countries just like North America is, what difference does that make? Many countries in the continent have populations that are very nationalist. I agree that countries recognizing their champions in sports is tied to nationalism, and that Europe has some of the least nationalist people on earth, but the fact that there are many countries in the continent has nothing to do with nationalism. There are also many countries in Africa and a lot of them show a very strong sense of nationalism
@@TheTTax No champion is ever called "european" champion in Europe.. sounds more like the champion within Europe..there is no such thing as "european" as a distinct country.. while there is such a thing as "american" as a distinct country...
@@jad_crafting yes, I never said it wasn't. just that this fact is irrelevant to explain why countries recognize or not their chess players. in Europe, in other sports, some countries recognize their players/teams. This has nothing to do with the fact that there are many countries in the European continent.
I just noticed your channel GM Felix. The thing is I noticed this video of yours, thanks, at the time of 1:30am here in New Zealand. I was intrigued to hear of your historical references, in which I have an avid interest in/for same. I now know some dates and occurrences, although initially this was something I didn't pay much attention to when I was a schoolboy in Dunedin. I wish to ask if you're interested in being interviewed for my chess channel on Chess & Life according to...? Let me know if you so wish, I can pay juniors or similar locally, or other. Anyway, on the video side of things, herewith, I think it to be a very fair appraisal, and I at my lower level of chess, find that in/at a tournament, one ends up leaving, even if done well, and then there's a low point to event, especially if when away, no one of the introverts, ends up inviting me round for... So well done on your truths, which reminds me of a Grandmaster I interviewed, who said, a little different than what you mention, that once he became a GM, then soon after things returned to normality. I often say, even if I don't particularly mean it, that chess is just a game. And it is really, that's probably the issue at hand. Yes, for those that attend a club or similar at least, it's deemed good for that person, but overall, especially in a country such as mine, there's far better things to do in NZ than chess. The GM ended up stating without prompt, that the real importance for him, is that of his faith, if I may say same, which for me was extraordinary to hear. I wish you all the best with your profession and further successes in the chess arena. Magnus (At Oslo interview late last year) is of course speaking about more crowd involvement and participation, going the kind of Boxing Chess way. I don't personally appreciate this idea, and never have, even though I could do a bit of boxing, if I really needed to, but rather not thanks GM Nigel. Regards, and Happy New Year 2025. I best now get off to bed.
No, this is awesome, the real deal, real life! Much appreciated. The last time I read anything real and honest about chess life in Europe was from a US IM who went to Hungary. The organizers asked him if he wanted girls for tourist walks or girls willing to do more! I'm a lowly Canadian National Candidate Master (FIDE 2055) with a few GM scalps like GM Pia Cramling in a Vancouver simul. But I have a good job and run my own company on the side with annual income just under $150,000 before tax. The cost of living in Canada is also very high and president Trump is about to make it worse. This video will help many people considering turning pro. Well-done Felix.
more than financial aspect what i understood here is Europe needs community spirit that celebrates even small wins in tournaments only then it will understand how hard the big tournaments are. one doesn't need much money to acknowledge somebody's hard work. just an example, when my 6 yr old sister got elo 1100 we all made sweets for entire neighborhood, this for many may not be a big achievement but that recognition was important to her to push her to her current elo of 1800. Here chess just a competitive game but more like a cultural tradition. btw love how honest this video is ❤
This discussion highlights an important aspect of professional sports: success and income are largely determined by market demand, which is a natural result of capitalism. It’s not just about skill or dedication but how many tickets you sell and how much interest you generate. Take soccer as an example. Even semi-professional players can make a decent living because lower-tier games still attract sizable crowds and generate revenue. Compare this to chess, which, despite its intellectual appeal, doesn’t have the same widespread spectator interest. A similar comparison can be drawn between the NBA and WNBA. Both feature incredible athletes, but the income disparity between male and female players is staggering. Interestingly, WNBA players actually receive a higher percentage of league revenues compared to their NBA counterparts, yet their absolute earnings are much lower because the league itself generates far less revenue. This reflects audience interest, not unfair pay structures. Sports, while entertaining, don’t necessarily provide societal value beyond entertainment. If a sport doesn’t generate enough interest or revenue, it seems unreasonable to expect taxpayers to subsidize it. Many taxpayers work in jobs that are far from enjoyable, and they shouldn’t be responsible for funding a lifestyle that relies on niche interest. In the end, this isn’t about fairness but about how capitalism naturally prioritizes what the majority values. It might not feel ideal, but it’s the system we operate in.
I respectfully disagree. First of all, there is definitely potential to charge more than 30 EUR/h for a lesson as a GM. Yes, we Eastern Europeans charge less, but even here it's not totally uncommon for strong players to charge 40-50 EUR/h. High quality is always rewarded, it's not like all chess learners pick the cheapest offer all the time. Second, even though chess is a very popular game, it's still just a game. With the exception of football (and maybe few other sports and games), you can't really expect to make a living from it unless you are in top 50 or so in the world. And yet you said you were able to earn around 30k last year which should be more than a minimum wage in Austria if I am not mistaken. If I could earn a minimum wage in my poor country (which is comical compared to Austrian minimum wage), I'd be happy to quit my full-time job and do chess instead. I know it doesn't look or feel that way, but you ARE living the dream, bro. Just think about it for a second. You can feed and house yourself by just playing and teaching chess. I understand that 30k doesn't feel right given your obvious intelligence and presumably the huge amount of effort you invested, but you gotta appreciate what you have achieved already. And if you are still worried, just come to the Balkans and live like a king with that income.
Agree on many points. I am also very grateful for everything and can live nicely, as I said in the video. The video is more to inform people, who maybe are not aware of the financial struggles Grandmasters often face, when purely making a living from playing tournaments.
@febloh Sure thing, I don't think you are ungrateful, just wanted to point out that you have already achieved a lot :) You're on a good path, just keep doing it and don't worry too much about the future
Precisely why I live in Tbilisi and not in my former city of Vancouver. I can live comfortably solely on 1000€ here , in Vancouver I would need to work at least an extra 20 hours a week in order to survive .
I agree with you mostly, just small addition though. For players say from india it's very difficult to come to Europe and play if no one is sponsoring you. Often huge sacrifices are made by parents of the players involved. Yes rewards are far more but only small percentage of players get it. Over all good points made. Specially how little that German player got. 3000 euro is actually far less than what I make in Germany per month.
@febloh on the other hand though, lots of Indian companies hire sport personalities and give them salary so that they can just focus on sports and not worry about earning money. This is very nice cushion to have. This is not present in other countries. If companies in other countries also did this, it would promote sports a lot like now it does in India.
I believe the main problem is that economics education is still pretty much absent from the West, otherwise we'd all have gone through a chapter or two on the "starving artist" phenomenon while we're still 10 years old and would have time to work out some strategies, perhaps at the personal level by getting early sponsors, or the societal with something like Universal Basic Income so at least the rent would be paid, then we could figure things out. The USA in all it's greed has the college scholarships that extend an athlete's or artist's "childhood", so they can consolidate their skills and figure out what business model might work for them, and even some extra generous sponsors that can't be found in Europe, probably because of the overall stagnation and conservatism of the Old Continent. I guess starvation will have to remain an integral part of creation, otherwise we're all going to be sellers of nonsense products like Levy's courses and t-shirts. You're even a bit lucky at the 2600 level, there's even more of a pile up at 2500 where income might be 5000 euro a year and the constant dilemma of "go all in or not"!
Well said 👏. We hope to get support in Europe too. But how and who can find sponsers for good players. If we atleast start getting some sponsorship to travel and stay all over , that is also an improvement. Rich people should come forward to help and support 😢. Ofcourse prize money is aso important. Dilema to continue chess or quit.
This video was a bold move and I really really like your honesty! Though I'm not surprised by these facts (and experiencing simular problems on my own field), it's pretty sad that this beautiful game is not valued & paid enough. I guess you know as well, but things are even worse here in Hungary - our nr. 1 player Richard Rapport switched federation because even as a top player he still earned minimum wage (ridiculous amount even by hungarian standards) and just simply couldn't finance his career. I think in a sense you're lucky though because coaching & content creation is really not for everyone but you seem to be comfortable with both. Since you're around that age, have you ever considered going to college? A lil history correspondence course maybe? 😊 I'm only wondering because being a student comes with so many benefits, it gives you time to see how things are going and maybe opens up other possibilities as well. Not that I would ever recommend you to give up chess, I have huge respect for you for mastering something at such a high level under so many years, and I don't think your point with this video was to recieve advices from strangers on how to live your life anyways. 😀
Thanks Linda! I'm actually positively surprised, I thought I was gonna get much more hate 😅 It's such a shame, that the situation in Hungary is so bad, considering all the Chess Legends your country has brought forward. I though about and I'm still thinking about studying at university, but would only do it if the education is actually good, not just for the certificate. But for now I'm really happy pursuing Coaching, Content Creation and Playing on the side :-)
Classical chess will always remain interesting to 1.4 billion people in India for a couple of reasons. We already have a format in cricket known as Test Cricket which goes for 5 days and each day the game goes on for 7-8 hrs and if both teams play well, the match may well end up being a draw as well on the end of 5th day. Also, India definitely has this hero worship culture. We see it reflected in our politicians,celebs,athletes,etc and i definitely see it spreading to some of the biggest indian talents like Gukesh,Pragg,etc. Also, I was watching this lecture by a professor in a western university and he was talking about why cricket never became big in the US and why it probably wont become big ever in the US. I think his logic applies to chess as well. If you look at the most commoly followed sports in the US, they are NBA and NFL and others as well. And when there is a draw, you dont stop the game because you have to have a winner and a loser. So we go into overtime. Classical chess does not offer that unfortunately. Also its a cultural thing as well. What does Bush say - You are either with us or against us. Its friends or foes. Whereas both cricket and chess are gentlemanly sports. There is no shouting yelling or overt celebrating in your opponents faces. We dont quite have the Conor Mcgregor equivalent in our sport yet. Also the with us or against us mindset does not deal well with the gray. Its very black and white and there is no room to maneuver. Couple more reasons could be demographics and Academic and Scientific excellence. Europe and the western world had great demographics in the 19th century and they were at the front of cutting edge technology,research,inventions,etc. Now the case is different for both demographics and scientific/academic temper. The demographics we all know and i feel like, i dont know about europe but we have data that an influencer/youtuber is higher up on the list of professions young people want to pursue. I wonder if that could be leading to a fall in interest in chess as well. India has the demographics, we have always be super obsessed with education, academic excellence especially in STEM. Also our history has these wonderkids in maths,science,astronomy. We have so many human calculators, people who are math prodigies,etc. There is a level of respect of intellect in India which is much much higher than anywhere else. Not sure how much of the above is totally true but the above are some observations i definitely think can be thought through. Let me know what you think about the above reasons.
At the end of the day its a game. Formats other than blitz are boring for regular viewers, even people who play the game. Bobby Fischer described problems with chess perfectly - its all about memorization and preparation. That holds true even more now. I rarely play or watch chess and when I do, its Hikaru, Gotham or someone like that who has the personality and can talk about something other than chess when they play.
I'm not that informed, but if you want to pivot into another career, I'm sure the skills you learned from chess and the discipline required can help you. I read about many former chess players that became investment banking for example & if you want to go to uni, being a GM is a strong extracurricular skill that might count as a special merit even if you don't have the grades necessary in some universities.
Yeah, when cost of living goes up significantly and prizes stay the same it's a problem. Same for the ordinary workers who get paid 1K-2K a month, they feel it too. Blame inflation. Blame the goverment. Blame FIDE. It sucks i know. At least you have the option to teach and create content. Imagine a bookkeeper who makes 1,5K a month what he can do? Can he run a youtube channel or teach bookkeeping for additional income? Current economic situation sucks for everybody, not just chess players.
Do you know if there´s any possibility of getting a scholarship in the US? I think you can capitalize on the system of chess, that you dont need to do as well as you did last year (cof cof tennis, if you dont defend your points here goes the ranking). It gives you more versatility, bc maybe one day if you choose to have children you wont want to be as much active, idk.
Yeah, I got some scholarship offers, but I love living in Europe! I guess it sounded like I hate it here but that's not the case at all 😅 I wanna try building a sustainable business with chess for the next few years and if it doesn't work out, I could still turn to University, that's my strategy:)
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I am GM, ELO 2616. I had similar thoughts, when I stopped my chess professional career at the age of 26 and switched to “normal” job. I am totally agree with Felix, just have to add that being chess professional player is not very good for your family life because of your constant absence.
Another thing that Felix might not have thought about is that the being a chess pro is not easy for non-super GMs anywhere, not just in Europe. For example, lots of indian GMs are probably trying to be the next Gukesh, Arjun. Pragg etc. A lot of them will never make it.
@@yuriydrozdovskyy5167 yes, i wish Andrew Tate’s dad stuck around him more
@@yuriydrozdovskyy5167 Thanks for your comment, Mr. Drozdovskij!
Thanks for pointing out the family aspect, it's something I should have mentioned more seriously in the video. This is actually one of the biggest issues for professional chessplayers. I assume it's the same for all professions that require a lot of traveling though.
@yuriydrozdovskyy5167 I would imagine that many problems that 2600 players face could be solved in such a way that helps in the job market in areas involving software dev, database design and related areas. For instance, how about the problem of which opening to choose. Suppose you want to automate the task of choosing your next 4 to 5 moves (assuming your opponent stays mainstream and doesn't play something like Na3). This is a hugely complicated problem. You've got to consider your own record in each opening, your opponent's record in each opening, how drawish each opening is, the relative value of a draw versus a win. Being able to design solutions to this should be very marketable.
you dont have the carisma to make huge money like Nakamura or Botez Sisters. Today chess is over, the stream business is monopolized by Hikaru, Botez cocaine sisters, and other female (addressing no lifer losers gen z).
I saw ex world champs streams with 50 viewers which is ridiculous but understandable because they can't entertain, dont speak, and they are not pretty female.
That's it.
Ah yes, consider also that chess is a dead game where a child can just memorize lines from engine and destroy you anytime.
Levy Rosman and anish Giri have both basically advised against a professional chess career. They both said the top 20 in the world do okay, but otherwise it’s going to be a struggle financially. It’s essential to hear this message bc it’s so easy to get caught up in the dopamine and the glamour of watching people on RUclips who have made it. But we don’t see the thousands of people who don’t make it. So I Ty and really appreciate you sharing your experience ❤
🙏🙏🙏
it's not a struggle financially if you stream. But the stream business is already over, you had to be present 8hours/day during pandemic, now it's over, monopolized by Cocaine Botez Sisters and Hikaru (and few others)
@@febloh There are some commonly held, false assumptions about some highly skilled positions in life. Number one is the belief that is something requires a great deal of skill is automatically *valuable*. Another false concept is the idea that people known to have high skills are alone at the top or rare humans. Lastly, that high skill and commitment towards an endeavor relate to money in any way at all. All of these are grossly inaccurate. Chess is a game... a GAME, and games are escapes from reality and not practical...not reality/not practical. 99.9% of the world think actually playing any kind of game is a waste of time that could be spent making money. There are more than 8 Billion people on the planet so at least ONE HUNDRED MILLION that could eventually play chess at top levels (at least Grandmaster). Why don't they? They know in every way It's a Game, not Work. Chess is not a career, it is not something in high demand, it is not contributing meaningfully to society, it is not even a contributor to life-skills. The idea that chess would give ANYONE a financial return is preposterous. Some do earn a meager living playing chess...so do people that solve Rubik cubes, so do people playing many games, but it is only a tiny proportion of the relatively tiny players trying to do it for money and their earnings are low, and not based in Chess, but actually in the entertainment value it provides...which is in exceptionally low demand relative to the population. It is not a job, it is not a career, it is not a financial venture, it is not a position considered of high value to the population.
i dont know about other countries, but in india if you are a professional chess player or have achieved a title be it a male or female candidate you are immediately given a "job" position at a govt corp. like railways or other industries . some big private co. also give you a permanent job , the player doesn't even have to show up to work most of the time just as long as they are actively playing in tournaments . Vishy anand sir, was wealthy when he started but Gukesh and prag , Vaishali were not but their communities folks and these corporations ( companies come only after title win ) helped them financially.
@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf the number of professional chess players is a very small number. Like 2,000 GMs which is 1 GM for every 4 million people on the planet. So I think practically everybody on the planet understands what you’re saying. ❤️
Good points and good video. I discovered a similar situation when I was trying to become a professional cyclist. I learned that the world just doesn’t need very many professional cyclists.
Fortunately the world needs tons of chess coaches since learning chess is something every child should do.
I am from Argentina. Najdorf was always an independent insurance agent. Panno is an engineer specialized in roads and communications, now retired and gives classes in River Plate. All have jobs here except Faustino Oro who lives from sponsors.
Great examples! Even crazier, since those players belonged to the top back in their day
@@febloh yes, but that was also the pre-woke days where educations and reputations where eternal and you could return to building roads after 10 years of mainly playing chess. Now some 25 year old woke HR "specialists" would have to greenlight you if you dared drop off the corporate scene of a few months or years.
@@germank7924 What's woke?
@@germank7924 I'm not sure how this is connected with being woke lol .. but otherwise youre right
Also helps that he’s a child maybe
It's funny that you mention tennis. Basically anyone outside the top 200 is losing money (trying to) playing professionally.
Lower ranked players trying to make it have to pay a lot of flights, hotels etc. In the lowest tier tournaments, of the ~60 players playing in a tournament, maybe the top 4 will leave without losing money. One injury can mean that your career is over and smaller injuries might reduce your income to zero for a decent stretch of time.
Of course anyone inside the top 50 is making great money but being a lower ranked professional is extremely tough and the competition really hard.
I think it's a general problem with individual sports, they are all very top heavy.
Btw if you want to experience the great intersection of chess and tennis, come to the chess tennis masters in Vienna in August ;)
Thanks for your constructive comment, I didn't know that! As you said, it's a problem in all sports, might have forgotten to say that in the video.
When's the event? Always wanted to participate 😁
@febloh I am an avid tennis spectator. This type of financial complaint is at least as common in the tennis community as in the chess community. The chess GMs have some advantages and some disadvantages over the top 200 players. Chess advantages: Tennis players can't give lessons remotely. There is far less demand for tennis books than chess books. Chess players generally have low expectations with regard to future earnings whereas tennis players, with dollar signs in their eyes, and egged on by their parents, often have unreasonable earnings expectations. Tennis advantages: The number of people who can earn a decent income from tennis is greater than in chess. Approx 150 in tennis versus 30 in chess. So you could say chess is 5 times as difficult. However, there is far more global interest in tennis than in chess so the competition might be more than 5 times as tough to make up for this. There may be more demand for tennis coaching than chess coaching.
@@paulepstein9739 Very nice analysis! Don't forget the chess advantage of earning by YT-channels or live-streaming, that's very difficult with tennis. And I like that one: "There is far less demand for tennis books than chess books" - very funny even though you've been serious. 😄😄
@@mranonymous8815 Glad you appreciated the post. On the tennis side, there are also some interesting avenues for those who can't survive on the prize money. I used to work for a major bookmaker and one of my colleagues was a 35 year old who had been ranked in singles in the 120 to 130 range -- yes, about the 125th best tennis player in the entire world! (Exact ranking withheld to preserve confidentiality). Since his peak was 120 to 130, his ranking may have been approx 300 when I knew him. He was on the team which set the odds for the tennis betting. Of course, this is an area of employment that is unavailable in chess -- chess betting is extremely rare.
@@mranonymous8815 and you don't have to be a top player in chess to become successful on YT/Twitch, just have to be enternaining/making headlines to make it your career
chess is just depressing as a whole Ive felt like giving up on chess and I cant imagine the stress especially of players with hard financial situations trying to make it big towards a FIDE title and becoming a grandmaster which just drains you altogether. the amount of people talking garbage about you and making you feel like your worth nothing just sucks and to be a professional I cant imagine how terrible it feels even when you win a game or an event its not over till its over which makes it hurts more. its a job that you know wont finish till your in the podium and its honestly heartbreaking to see how many players crumble when nearing the top or trying to get into the spotlight but simply collapsed and cant take the pressure anymore. i am still gonna aim for FM and hopefully if possible maybe I can become a GM even If I myself doubt it but as a career its really just depressing. glad you shared your story it really shows that chess is just not as exciting as its cut out to be but at least we have moments that make up for it regardless of our bad days and lets us sleep with a hope in our minds craving for happiness and a perfect day where you feel like your at the best and doing well..... thanks for hearing me out you are an amazing GM and we are all proud of you for telling us your journey and story
If chess is depressing, don't put effort into becoming a GM. Seriously. Your comment basically reads as "I hate chess. I think I might devote my life to it." Don't.
For me chess is not depressing, I'm having a great time but I'm also not trying to be a professional chess player
@@beeble2003 nah i like chess and would love to be a GM but the career aspect is simply stressful and hard if you are suffering financially. if I did have a dream goal it would be to become a strong American GM that's loves to play OTB blitz
Chess is not a career unless you attain popularity or have the connections to be a pro second. Take that wonderful brain of yours and apply it to building a skill.
I appreciate and applaud your courage to bring this to chess fans and the general public's attention. As an old old FIDE 2215 player from decades ago, I continue to follow the game. But as I grew up as a schoolboy during the Bobby Fischer craze (and regret that the focus in chess did not continue, especially here in the USA after 1972), it was very disheartening that chess fell back into game status. Yes, as stated below, chess appears to be in the 'artistic' realm, and much like a struggling but talent musician. The US has always been worse than Europe, unless you are extremely talented, young, and have financial backings from family and friends. Even now, we have several 2600-2700+ young players that only rarely play and pursue other careers, and play chess as a hobby.
Thank you for sharing your perspective!
One small correction: Frederik did not get the money for the individual medal, this is the regular fee he gets for participating in the national team and it is paid by the German Chess Federation to every player through the sponsorship with UKA. The other members of the team received similar money, regardless of any individual performance. The same goes for the women's team, although they only get half of what the men get. And this also applies to participation in European Team events. And World Team Championships for Germany.
In general the problem is that most federations simply do not care, because they do not suffer from bad conditions for the pros and in general just massively lack any ambition to improve the chess ecosystem, which is just such a pity.
most federation, have better salary and conditions, and players have worse and worse. so we have money in chess but just not for the players.
Thanks for the correction!!
You're absolutely right. There's not much ambition to improve things for the players, also because chessplayers are happy to get anything at all in many cases.
GM Elisabeth Pähtz talked about that as a guest on a TV show, that women get only half the money for participating. This is a FIDE chess tournament, not football, it's really crazy that in the german chess association such a rule still exists.
As a european (hungarian) hobby chess player and chess enthusiast, it is so sad to hear all these. We, in Hungary also feel a big decline in our chess world (after Maróczy, Portisch, Lékó, Polgár, Almási, Rapport, etc.).
I hope more talented players emerge from Hungary.
❤
My favorite player is Hungarian, Zoltan Ribli. I try to play even his same repertoire.
Actually Fischer was half-hungarian as well.
@@mranonymous8815 Yes, his father was Paul Neményi, a Jewish Hungarian scientist.
@@attilahalmai4590 Yes! A sad development for such a famous chess nation..
Thank you for sharing your insight. I have a tremendous respect for the players and their sacrifices. Nobody has the answers but at least you’re not alone.
I have the answer. Get a profession that pays well. And what is the "sacrifice" that chess players are making? Entitled much?
@micas099 I don’t have much time for small minded people like you. These players have sacrificed their childhood only to be broke with little prospect for upward mobility. Chess is a serious discipline that impacts each player differently. Some of which only reveal themselves later in life. Show a little respect.
That's being an artist for you. I remember Eric or Aman did a similar video on their channel a year or two ago and it was a much the same story for them (you're right though, that video is about the only other example I can think of).
Even though your situation is difficult, to come as close to sustainable solvency in a creative field as you already have is a remarkable achievement and a testament to your discipline, determination, and mental strength. You have good reason to be proud of yourself; you are more genuinely and meaningfully successful than the millions of people who settled (or had to settle) for stable, secure, well paying jobs that have little or nothing to do with their real passions and interests. I hope you can find/create a solution that works to let you keep doing what you love even when you decide to take on the extra financial responsibility of starting a family. All the best.
He's not an artist, he is an athlete at the top 0,000001 % of his field who can barely sustain himself.
@Carnagath82 i should have specified, a competitive artist
@@Carnagath82 He's 422 in the world an nobody cares about him playing a board game, the entitlement is crazy.
@@stello61 You're correct. I went to college, got a degree in engineering, make a lot of money, and work from home. If I was unhappy with my situation, I'd change it. Nobody is going to fix the problem for Felix other than Felix.
artist LOL
I feel in my country (India) we don't have as many sports achievements as most European countries (who win multiple gold medals at every Olympics) which is why we celebrate the wins which are few and far in between grandly and give out massive cash prizes.
Haven't thought about it like that, would have to look into the statistics.
I also had the feeling, that Indians specifically, are more patriotic, compared to european countries. Apart from that, you guys just appreciate everything much more than Europeans (unfortunately) do, please correct me if I'm wrong.
India people are athletically weaker and slower than Europeans and Africans, hence any sport that requires any physical ability they are very poor at in comparison.
It’s the reason they are good at cricket as this involves very little athleticism…it’s more a game of technique.
@@febloh True Indians are very patriotic but that's partly because it's a developing country where things are improving constantly and more and more achievements are coming. Europe is already rich and stagnating so you guys don't really care much anymore. As for chess, thankfully Indian government funds chess well e.g paying a salary to all grandmasters and giving them a government job. On the other hand, physical sports other than cricket are not funded at all, which is partly why we are so bad at olympics sports compared to Europe.
@@ym276Yeah, India can do well in Olympics if gov selects and supports sports persons well. So many talents couldn't go to Olympics because of lack of support or knowledge.. Many people don't know how to get selected for National sports or international competitions..
An American here. Europe seems to be one of the nicest areas to be a professional chess player in to me. Apart from a country like India, which funds chess from government and private sectors, Europe seems to have the best consistency and quality when it comes to organizing chess events.
The government thing is absolutely new here, where government actually needs to fund and build facilities is for our Olympic athletes, but the short-sightedness and ever chasing short term votebank politics will never lead to that. It's always about the low hanging fruits here...
Wonderful video. Thank you for taking the time to explain about these important issues.
My pleasure!
Thanks for talking about these sorts of topics that are often swept under the rug, it really gives people a window into the struggles of the chess world. I started playing when I was 17 in high school (about to be 5 years ago februrary) and I'm 100% self taught and just started playing OTB last year february and I'm now around 1900. For context I'm canadian and I haven't played many OTB tournaments due to opportunity but I'd love to make chess work somehow but I'm under no illusion that i'd be the best in the world or anything like that to be anywhere close to financially stable off chess alone, but I've dedicated a lot of time to the game would like to make it work as a career, even if it'd be coaching. I live with my parents right now so I don't have too many financial struggles or anything but I'm about to graduate from university this year and things are going to move quick after that I imagine. Do you have any advice for me? I'm for sure interested in pushing for a title, probably NM or CM at the very least, but I'm not sure how I should go about it. Should I begin coaching before getting a title? If so, how? I tried applying for chesscon coaching but they basically flipped me off and I don't see why anyone would want coaching from a 1900 when there's infinite titled players who charge dirt cheap prices. Sorry if this is all over the place, I tried getting out the important points to give you enough info while being respectful of your time. If you have any advice at all please feel free to tell me. Be it to suggest to work extra hard this year or drop it all together, I'm all ears. Thanks a ton
you've started too late by any definition to join the ranks of "make a living on the chess circuit". That doesn't mean you shouldn't pursue your passions of course, if competitive chess is one of them. Do keep in mind that if you make GM out of this starting point you might be just the 2nd or 3rd person in world history that made it! The "obvious" advice is to develop your chess business, ie coaching, perhaps "content creation", perhaps "organizer" (you know, where you collect entry fees from 100 players and hope by the end of the tournament some of the fees are your profit), and anything else you can imagine, chess lobbyist, whatever. Coaching is a "people business" and a certain magic touch can take you much further than rating and titles. But really all this is the Plan B, the Plan A is to do something with your education that allows you to pay bills without robbing you of all your free time and energy. Just to leave you with some euro-imagery, before the current crop of 16 year olds in the world's top 30, we had a kind of chess pro that was 30 or older, and in order to continue living the dream of going to tournaments and compete for cash prizes, they were living the "van life", going from tournament to tournament in a camper or couchsurfing and so on and so on. This was possible and desirable in select few locations, for example in southern Spain where there's one tournament after the other along the coast, or somewhere between Serbia/Croatia, Czech and Hungary. So yeah, if you want a lot of chess you might need the van life, and in fact the van life in Europe!
@@germank7924 Thanks for the thought provoking response!
Yeah I'm definitely not having delusions of grandeur that I'll be an IM or GM, and definitely nowhere near that anytime soon, especially while having to support myself. But you're probably right that the best approach is to just keep perusing it as my passion while finding a job to keep me satisfied in the mean time with my degree and work on building up content/coaching/organizing on the side and seeing if I can turn that into anything substantial. You're definitely right that coaching is a people business more than anything, tough part is I'm not as good of a people person as I should be Lol, guess it's something I'll have to hone in on eventually. I don't see myself living the van life anytime soon, I don't think my girlfriend would be too happy... Lol. But I think I'll give competitive a little more of a shot to push hard and get a low title hopefully within the next year. Then work on my getting myself a stable income and building a coaching resume and only then maybe think about having one more go at competitive chess if I still have it in me at that time.
Cheers and thanks again for the thoughtful comment!
Reality check. A rating of 1900 is a personal achievement to be proud of but you're 500 points behind an International Master, meaning that you'd be expected to score a little over 5% in games against minimum-rating IMs. You'd expect to score about 3% against minimum-rated GMs. If a tournament has prizes big enough to make a living from, there will be IMs and GMs playing, so you are not going to win those prizes. You're not good enough to make a living from _playing_ chess. 1900 says "I'm good at chess and it's my main hobby", not "professional player".
I don't know much about coaching or YouTubing, so take the rest of what I say with a pinch of salt. People probably want to be coached by somebody considerably better than themselves, so that would limit your market to people with ratings a good chunk below 1900. Is there enough of a market there? Sure, there are lots of players down there, but they're mostly just playing for fun, so do they want a coach? Is coaching in schools an option? (But, even if it is, you can only do five after-school chess clubs a week, which is 5-10hrs work per week, and schools don't have the money to pay you a day's wages for 1-2hrs work. And usually one of the teachers is good enough to coach the school team for free.) RUclips looks pretty crowded, to me. Again, there are plenty of popular IMs and GMs on RUclips. You can't compete with them on chess quality, so you need some other way of attracting people to your channel versus theirs.
@@beeble2003 I think you misunderstood my comment a bit, I'm under no illusion that I'm GM or IM material. I've played OTB for under a year and I'm 1900 with limited amount of tournaments, online I'm anywhere from 2400-2600, not that that's really anything to write home about but just adding context. I've beaten plenty of IMs and GMs online and unfortunately have thrown so many completely winning games against them OTB, which is all to say I can hold my own sometimes and if I don't buckle under pressure I can grab some wins here and there. I don't think 1900 is my peak, otherwise I wouldn't even consider pursuing chess competitively. Here tournaments other than huge tournaments like zonals have at best ~$500 prizes for first and ~$100 entries. Usually theres a 2300 slavic folk who just mops the floor with everyone and theres the occasional IM so you'e definitely right that the prize money just isn't there. Just to reiterate I never suggested, nor would, that as a 1900 I'm a professional chess player, obviously that goes without saying.
I tend to agree with you in that most players basically want player stronger than themselves (most often a titled player) regardless of teaching ability. I'd thrive on teaching ambitious students but those are few and far between unfortunately and why should they want my coaching over a titled player who barely teaches anything but has a title and charges dirt cheap. The only other approach would be to garner an audience from, like you said, a crowded space like youtube that has no shortage of shoving courses and books and lessons down your throat. It sucks but it is what it is. As for OTB lessons and such, unfortunately where I live theres very few chess clubs and most are unfeasibly far to hold as a regular job and like you said even if I picked up 5 hours here and there it's not going to be sustainable. I pitched a chess program to my local community center a few years back but because of corona they had to call it off which was unfortunate. I have hope for the future that money will start coming into chess and there'll be a rise in eyes on it and newcomers willing to learn, unfortunately that doesn't seem like it's in the near future so from all the advice I got I'm pursuing it on the back burner for now so I don't sabotage my future self by hoping. I appreciate the feedback 👌
Find a group of kids to teach chess to. Then slowly expand from there by word of mouth to the friends of those parents. It’s gonna suck but kids is where the money is at for chess and parents are willing to pay $50 to $100 per hour for in person lessons. Many parents have a strong desire in this day and age to get their kids AWAY from the computer screens. Having a title or not doesn’t really matter for these parents either - they just want their kids to learn. Of course if your students hits like 1700 in rating then you can refer them to a master or someone stronger than you.
Felix, thanks for sharing those insights and especially your transparency! From my point of view, if by the age of around 15 to 18 it is not obvious that you do have a realistic chance to make it into the like top 50 or so, you simply need to have a plan B. For example, you do go to university and start producing chess content on the side. Even if it is going to take you twice as long to finish your university studies, you do, at least, have a fall back. I also don't think that chess coaching is having to much of a promising future. I'm convinced that within the next couple of years we will see some chess AI which you simply feed with your games and said AI will point out your weaknesses and deficits and suggest a training plan. I wouldn't be surprised, seeing such a tool being offered by the usual suspects in the online chess market.
Felix, thanks for your honest and sincere coverage of issues, and as you pointed out, the top 100 in chess is actually hurting as well.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Felix. I do a lot of chess related things with coaching and organising tournaments. I hold a NI title with FIDE and I am a National Arbiter with FIDE. These "side jobs" bring in a little bit of money for me but I am in no way in any position to quit my day job for chess - I love chess and I completely sympathise with your all of your concerns about the state of professional chess. If I was ever to want to do this full-time I would struggle financially, would need to coach and tournament organise everyday for work that many other chess players would consider to be "just a hobby" and give a little amount for all your time and effort. If I did this full-time I would feel aggrieved that in doing all of these things I would end up hating the game and would have no time to ever improve my own game.
Thanks for sharing your story 🙏🙏
Thank you for sharing your insights! I am nowhere near your strength, but I grew up playing chess, tried out tournaments in my early 20s, and was able to cobble together a living as a decent National Master in the United States (just under 2300 FIDE). But it is not a comfortable living and I accepted this going into it. I managed for a few years, but felt burned out from playing multiple weekend and weekday events every month, plus teaching after school programs and private lessons was the only way to make a living (as you mentioned, the biggest loss was travel expenses and for me entry fees). If I had stuck around longer, I might have been able to take advantage of the chess boom during the pandemic, and gotten into streaming, content creation etc. but I am happy with what I accomplished in a few years, as my main goal was to improve and enjoy the game. but I definitely saw a lot of much more talented players than myself who probably could have gone on to become IM/GM but left the game because they couldn't make a sustainable living.
Thanks for sharing your story!! I hope everything turned out well for you in the end and that you're able to enjoy the game more now :)
Finally, I also thought that maybe being blitz/rapid good instead of classical good is more economically advantageous because tournaments are shorter so overall stay is cheaper 😞
4:15 as someone from Austria who doesn't know anything about the history of chess in Austria I'd be interested in such a video
it sucks, and you are young. Try to imagine how really, really bad it is going to suck when you turn fifty. I once talked to an older GM trying to make money on the open tournament circuit in the eastern half of EU. The guy was miserable to an absurd degree. I drew him, it was a success for me for a moment, and then I started thinking I should have thrown the game to him. Little to no money, no friends or family I think, and the game he loved when he was younger turned into a torture tool. For retirement, I have no clue what he was doing. Next station homeless shelter
Duras once defeated Schlechter in a tournament (Hamburg 1910? I think) and Schlechter had a nervous breakdown, crying that he needs the prize money to feed himself. Duras threw a game to a non-entity in the next-to-last round, making sure that Schlechter won the tournament. Schlechter died of hunger in Vienna in 1918 anyway
Two stories which are sad and a good and often occurring example. Fortunately, no one in Europe will end up like Schlechter, but you made a good point.
This is not meant to be an insult, and I don’t think you are, but the issue boils somewhat down to entitlement. in the end, one has to realize that chess is just a game. Professional gaming is only a reality in highly industrialized economies (or prestige-seeking nations) because it depends on a body of ordinary people with enough income and leisure time to consume the game. Because in itself chess doesn’t generate economic (but I concede cultural) value, it’s in essence a service that fills the free time of workers. Look how many content creators and players so desperately try to construct an economy around the game to generate as much income as possible, content creation, education, apps. But the reality, compared to soccer, for instance, is that chess is not marketable enough in terms of attire, ticketing, exposure and sponsorship to sustain a living for all players. It’s not meant to be that way, and if you want it that way, the professionals need to construct this environment themselves, and the harsh reality in this economy is, that effort and success are not causally linked, but their definition is highly subjected to money.
I agree with other commentators that the situation is similar for athletes across the board. Look at the participants at the Olympic Games for instance
Thanks for your very constructive comment! You're absolutely right, I guess everyone in their niche wants better conditions - often unjustifiably so. Thanks for giving me your opinion, I'll think a lot about it!!
@@febloh I know you offer coaching but what about the market in this area and for chess teachers in schools? I would think students want their coaches to be as strong as possible and you may be underselling yourself in terms of your achievements. You are 22 years old? Maybe find out how many people under 23 have a higher rating than you and market yourself as Xth best under-23 GM in the world. I used to have professional chess coaching but I lost my job and so can't afford it any more.
@@paulepstein9739 Maybe.. Not sure, that a young age of the coach is something which is necessarily attracting students, since I'd assume most people are looking for experience in a Trainer. (Which I have 17 years of, but still..😅)
It's a great thought though, I'll definitely keep it in mind. Thank you!!
@@febloh I'll keep you in mind when I am able to afford coaching.
you defuse your own argument. why are soccer players entitled to earn millions why chess players on the same international level can barely get by? maybe the chess institutions should draw some money in? they could and they should. the failure is neither in the sport itself nor in the players.
I think the situation is broadly similar for all sports. Even in the huge global sports like tennis and golf, those outside the top 150 or so struggle to make a decent living. With other less popular sports like badminton, snooker, darts, biathlon etc, the situation is just as bad if not worse than chess.
True. The way I see it though, is that in chess even if you're in the Top 100, in some cases even Top 50, playing alone is still not a reliable source of income. Nevertheless your argument is still very good and in the future I'll be more careful comparing chess to other sports. Thanks for your constructive input!!
@@febloh It's not just chess. In Academia, all but the very best academicians and researchers also have to teach multiple classes and have office hours. This could more so be seen as a failure of parenting since they push their kids to focus all their attention on a board game. I imagine the parents like having a prodigy-like child to brag about, instead of instilling wisdom about how to actually make a living. Unless the kid is a generational talent, it is either the fault of the parents for the aforementioned reason, or the fault of the chess player that refuses to think they should have to do more than move wooden pieces to make a living.
Its also similar for artists, e.g. piano players, dancers. Devoting their youth to the subject as prodigys translate into a good income as an adult only if they have very exceptional solo careers with audiences paying or if they get long-term employed by an orchestra/dance company in main roles, or as a coach. My ex wife is an East Germany "state trained" ballet dancer but in her late teens she dropped out because competition for becoming a ballerina was too hard/the body developed slightly less advantageous for that. Although she was extremely good. Concerning government support this is only/mainly common in rather centralistic states (formerly socialistic) and not really in the western liberal market model. So in the end the only way seems to be to market yourself as coach, content provider, go into chess-niches if possible. Or switch fields using the exceptional chess skill as a "proof" of very strong analytical abilities (like a maths PhD - here the concrete content also is only rarely really relevant on the later job): Some players worked e.g. for finance or strategy consulting firms - but this would be a career outside of chess. Currently there is a need of young talents due to demographics.
@@derekluna7700 "In Academia, all but the very best academicians and researchers also have to teach multiple classes and have office hours."
Teaching is a fundamental part of being an academic, so I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, here.
I think the problem is that Chess is mostly not a Team Play. You are the only one responsible for your income.
Great video. Thank you for the insight! I'm looking forward to more content from you. 👍
Thank you so much!!
I'm old enough to remember Evgeny Sveshnikov talking about this in the 80s or 90s. He campaigned quite hard (but unsuccessfully) to achieve a much fairer package for professional players. His idea was to allow games to be copyrighted to the two players involved. Consequently, any time a game was shown in mass media, like magazines, books, databases, video streams etc. the players received a small fee, or royalty, much as music artists do when their works are broadcast on tv, radio etc. This steady trickle of royalties from each published game, in combination with traditional prize money, would, he argued, keep professional players financially buoyant.
Dealing with retirement, he suggested that only the player, or his/her authorized representative would be able to publish their own 'Best Games' book. As things stood, he felt it was morally corrupt that some random outsider can take a player's lifetime of creative output, and use it to generate sales that only they and their publisher benefit from.
Yes I've heard about that too. A really creative proposal by the Legend. It's somewhat forgotten now and will most likely never be discussed any time soon (maybe ever) again unfortunately.
This is great proposal.. people should discuss this more
Anish Giri
It won't work now. Why should I need the games of human players? Stockfish and Alpha Zero play much better. Just being honest.
@@artichoke60045 That's stupid thing to say.. It's like saying why I we need Olympics? Robots play much better..
Great video as always, making money playing chess of course is a tough task, but I didn't realize how much contrast there is between Europe and Asia for chess players, 3k for a gold medal at the Olympiad is insulting, that's like a 2nd place in Menorca or Ellobregat open.
Exactly 😅
Thanks for your comment!!😊
Hello Felix !
So the world goes on...
Maybe one of the solution to continue to be a chess professional is creating a community who can help you with a "montly cagnotte"?
First, for your chess career, second to have the privilege of sharing your games.
But it's difficult i suppose !
It s a pleasure to follow you.
Commenting for engagement. I hope for our top chess players to live comfortably so they can perform their sport at their highest level, without distraction or reservation. That should be the goal of any sports organization.
Thanks 🙏🙏
One word that would solve most of these issues....Qualifiers. Why is it that we have all these elite tournaments and 1 million amateurs willing to pay subscriptions...connec the dots and realize that if the chess organizers had around the clock online qualification tournaments then you would have a whole new area of chess sponsorship. Why is it that poker is so much more lucrative than chess ? Simple answer....there are qualification tournaments where the only prize is a ticket to the big event and the money is used to build the prize pools. Also this opens the door to raising money from the crowd of amateur players. As it stands you have to give a big percentage of open prizes to the class players. They would happily pay for qualification EF to prestigious events...even throw in hotel and airfare and you would still have a big extra pool of cash.
Great input! One issue which poker doesn't affect though, is cheating. If you organize that many events, it's gonna be really hard to have anti cheating measures in all of those events I assume - it would be possible though.
Still, I really like the idea!
But with poker, the weaker players can qualify for bigger events and if they qualify for the main event, they actually have a chance of winning. In chess, the weaker players would have zero chance of making it through the qualifiers and the strong players who do qualify would just get beaten up by the stronger players anyway.
@@andy4226uk Right, but people shell out money a lot more stupid things in life than say the opportunity to play their chess gods.
Also what if they could consult a computer or GM 2-3 times in the game ? The Chess world suffers from a serious lack of imagination and relies on this model of depending on a monopoly man to finance the whole thing.
Poker is a game for degenerated losers and it's NOT comparable to chess
You can‘t compare poker and chess in this case, a huge part of poker is variance which allows an amateur to do better than a pro quite regularly, the exact opposite in chess. Subscriptions work because you play people around your level and you can actively track your progress. There‘s no way I‘m paying $50 dollars for a weekly qualifier just to get absolutely smashed by titled players every game.
We need more people like you speaking up and adress the things to make a change happen 👍🏻
Thank you!! 🙏
GM Drozdovkij and GM Blohberger, thanks for sharing.
It might not seem much but the chess playing world respects your accomplishments.
I hope for a better future for chess professionals because it takes a lifetime of effort, especially in your formative years to reach the echelon.
Thanks for that!
If it's merely an issue of marketing then the onus is on the individual players to multitask and stretch themselves thin to become great players and build a brand around their likeness. Similar to any other abnormal career choice (think artist, professional skateboarder, etc.) very few achieve financial liberty. Chess doesn't have the financial backing or demand that more popular sports have and it's a shame, but on the other hand we sit on the shoulders of giants and if it isn't this generation that can survive purely off of chess then maybe its the next one. Very insightful video and good luck in your journey!
Thank you!!
Tennis players complain about similar problems. If you're not Top Ten and winning tournaments you're still a pro but don't earn enough compared to a normal job and have to scrape by with residencies and coaching lessons. Of course the prize money is much higher in tennis, but so are the costs and the health issues.
While that may be true for the number 250 in tennis, it certainly isnt for top 100 players that consistently make the main draw of grand slams. For example rus (ned) whose peak rating is 41 in the world and for most of her career has been somewhere between place 90-150 in the rankings, and for a good few years even lower, has 4 million dollars in career earnings so far, without actually performing at grand slams and without major titles. in the womens game where theres less money than in the mens game. So saying you cant make a living outside the top 10 in tennis is such a wild statement. A very average tennis player is earning what the top chess players are in prize money, not taking sponsorships into account
@@jimfeyenoord01 rudned has been world number 2 and won 12 atp tournaments, he is a top pro in tennis, of course he has made a bunch of money. you also have to deduct coach salary, physio salary, flights, housing, manager, equipment, pr agency and taxes from that earnings. tennis players outside the top 100 often complain that the costs are very high as well. there is various stories about tennis players barely getting by and having a lot of pressure. even at the top some players have burnt out - mardy fish, osaka, borg retiring at 26, etc etc - the pressure in tennis is huge - only a few are at the very top. the same applies to most individual sports like surfing, sailing, snooker, table tennis - there is tens of thousands of very good players worldwide competing for the titles - and obviously not everyone will get sponsored or get the titles.
Hallo Felix. Sehr gutes und offenes Video mit den verschiedenen Themen. Ich wünsche Dir auf deinem Weg weiterhin viel Erfolg und viele gute und interessante Partie und hoffe doch, dass Du dein Elo Rating verbessern kannst. Beste Grüsse aus der Schweiz, Stefan
Ich danke dir Stefan!!😊
excellent video! thank you
I have often thought about how the calculus of playing (non-elite) tournaments for money and whatnot simply can't make financial sense. Seemingly even with a win, you might not cover your expenses. And, even if you're always the strongest player at a tournament and have a good chance of winning, sometimes you slip up and maybe lose a game or make one draw too many, and someone has a great tournament and beats you, and you're down money for the whole tournament. Even if you win, you're living in constant financial stress, and mostly just playing against weaker players, which certainly won't help with reaching elite level!
Really enjoyed the video, I really like this sort of thing where it's just a person relating their unique experience and perspective in a relatively neutral, non-dramatic fashion. So much of chess content is aimed at teenagers who don't care for a balanced view, everything has to happen within 30 seconds so they don't lose interest, etc.
Good luck with your chess!
Well said! I'm glad you enjoy this long form content:)
And the situation today is much better than it was 40 years ago. Back then, I was the same age as you are today and I was also an ambitious young chess player who hoped to make a living from playing chess. Back then there was no internet and no online chess, there were no tournaments on the internet and the few chess professionals were either top ten or poorly paid.
Then you just had to make the logical decision to learn another profession, in my case it was EDV (today it's called IT) and I was very happy with this decision, I had a great job, I had lots of great colleagues and a very good salary. And I think everyone who can't turn their hobby into a career should still make that decision today, it's not a given. For example, I could also play the piano quite well, but earning money as a piano player in the classical field is definitely even harder than earning money as a chess player. There are far too many top-class players who play better than me anyway and who don't earn much either. That's just the way life is. You can't make the mistake of holding on to it by force. Don't make chess your profession, make it your hobby and you'll be happy.
Firstly thank you for sharing your perspective of being a chess player. I think that what you're saying is definitely true and things need to improve as the money put into it is appalling. You can't make a living as a chess player and have to do other things to even maintain a normal standard of living if you're not in the top 1%. Hopefully chess will start improving itself and making itself more appealing to more people so more money can be put into it hopefully!
wirklich wertvolle Einblicke, die du woanders nicht bekommst
Thank you for this video, GM Blohberger
My pleasure!
Dear Felix, thank you for the video. I hope most viewers know the drill, if you like to support your content creator: watch the video from start to finish, leave a thumbs up and a comment. That way YT algo picks it up and presents it to more people. IMHO coaching as it once used to be is dead. There are so many books, videos, courses that real 1:1 lessons are rarely needed or only needed for the super super serious students. In Triathlon Ironman makes a huge amount of money from their agegroupers, who are basically paying the money for the pros by paying their entry fees. But still same thing, unless you are not in the top 10 it is a tough financial situation. I really do hope that chess will become mandatory in schools that would create lots of chess jobs, if those are not also taken by AI as so many many other jobs will be. I follow you pretty much from the beginning and will also Subscribe +, once you are monetized. BTW also stream live, here and on twitch, would be additional income once their requirements are met. Yours, Jan
Thank you for all the support Jan, I appreciate it!!
Hi Felix, good to see you again! Are you planning to focus on content creation?
Regarding professional playing, I don’t think we can expect anything to change in the upcoming decades, if ever. The top players always will earn exceptionally well, the top 50 will make some decent money, and the rest must focus on everything else in chess except playing or choose another profession. I’m pretty sure this applies to other sports as well and chess is not unique.
You can make a good living by doing chess courses, coaching students, and, on top of everything, adapting to the rapidly changing chess world by creating content that will also influence your non-playing income. You’re popular, you earn more - it’s just how it is.
Nowadays, non-elite grandmasters rarely play in open tournaments to earn a living-usually, they’re there just to spend some quality time in a different environment, to socialize but clearly not to earn serious money. Sadly, there are also those who are unwilling to adapt to the reality of today.
Hey Arturs! Yes, I'm planning to pursue it, really have been enjoying it so far:)
You summarized everything perfectly. Especially the point that in other sports it's not any better is something I underestimated honestly.
The main point is that players need to adapt, you hit the nail in the coffin with that!
You need to understand something Felix - the countries that give substantial money to chess players (Uzbekistan, India, etc.) also happen to be the poor countries. US, Germany do not, because it’s a free economy and chess do not contribute to it.
The problem of chess watchability isn't learning the rules. I'm confident that the rules of soccer are more complicated. The problem is that you have to be quite skilled in it yourself to understand what's going on. Not so much with soccer.
well said - I don't understand any current GM games
I totally agree with this comment. I’m somewhat new to chess, and the high level games are beyond my understanding.
Well said, it is like watching a software engineering whiz coding away.
Exactly, In soccer if goal has happen then everyone knows goal has indeed happened, you don't need skill for that to understand.
This is just true in most sports. Just go look at all the small olympic sports: Even people in the top 30 are either from a very poor country, have some strange university support, or are outright rich. It's no surprise than Levy or the Botez sisters out-earn most tournament players: Their ads bring more money.
There's not enough money in chess. Not enough people watch, and something like a clothes advertisement isn't bringing anything. Being a professional chess player is just a much worse choice, on average, than dedicating the effort to something that actually pays well.
Imagine instead of a chess player, you wanted to just wanted to play a videogame for a living: say, Super Metroid. You aren't going to make it there without twitch and tips, and there might not be money for mode than 6 people doing that at all. You are in the entertainment industry either way.
True
Same reasons i gave up at 16 after 10+ years of practicing and learning and focused on other things. I loved it, it was a lot of fun, will never forget the first tournament and win, but it was clear that it's a path i can't continue without a background support 🙏 So many years later and seemingly nothing changed, that's indeed depressing - i hope it'll change in the future, this sport/hobby is something very-very special and definitely should be supported more in Europe!
Thanks for sharing! 🙏
Thank you for sharing your perspective.
My pleasure!
Really NICE explanation. You should continue with videos. Hopefully this might become your primary source of income in future. All the best 😊
Thank you!! 😊
If being in Europe is bad, imagine how it is in South America. There’s always someone in a better situation and someone in a worse situation than you.
Absolutely. I said that in the video too, I'm really happy to live in Europe!
European countries are more expensive but asian players have to spend a lot more money on travelling expenses
@@stroke6234 That's true
Hallo Felix, ich weis nicht ob du dich an mich erinnern kannst ich bin stolz auf dich wir kennen uns noch von früher bei Harald dem Trainer als wir 12-13 waren
In Japan where I live, the incentive structure of one of the most well-known national sports, sumo wrestling, is similar to chess. There are so many levels, and unless you're in the top two or three tiers and get to play/fight in front of large crowds, there isn't much money in pursuing the sport. Worse yet, in sumo, it's a long and arduous physical journey to even get to a competitive level, involving things like serving your seniors in the sumo stable like a servant, engaging in daily training bouts which are gruelling and can often lead to borderline abuse, and following a diet that while beneficial to a career in sumo has been proven to reduce average lifespans by almost 10 years due to poor cardiovascular health outcomes. By comparison, chess players have it easy -- you have a long career in the game (even after your playing days end, you can pursue a livelihood as a second or a coach if you stay in touch with the modern developments in opening theory and so on), you have an online presence now with the potential of a global audience and the relative lack of a language barrier.
Thanks for sharing. True, there are many other sports where it's even harder to make a living than in chess.
It's been a while!
I play chess because I love it, but I never really think of becoming professional as it means becoming a coach, and it doesn't appeal to me.
This is a very good!!
@@Chessgonemad Welcome back, glad to see you :)
Ein interessantes Thema. Es ist wirklich schwierig, dem Lebensstandard mit der regionalen Vergütung als Profispieler gerecht zu werden. Problematisch ist auch das Alter, bis zu welchem man spielen kann. Ich denke, dass hier insbesondere der Weg vieler Spieler, wie auch bei dir vermutlich, im Streaming und Content-Bereich tätig zu sein lukrativer sein dürfte, sobald sich die Basis aufgebaut hat.
Hab ich mir auch gedacht, das Alter ist bei anderen Sportarten aber in meinen Augen sogar ein noch größeres Problem, vor allem wegen frühzeitigen Verletzung. Schach kann man doch im Durchschnitt wahrscheinlich länger noch auf Top-Niveau spielen (Anand,Gelfand,...)
Danke auch, dass der Content-Bereich in der Zukunft sehr viele Möglichkeiten bietet. Danke dir für deinen konstruktiven Kommentar!! 😊
In the west, the attitude is that sports players should only get paid what money they can bring in through ticket sales, TV contracts, endorsements, etc. The government may support some things like the olympic teams, but only at a basic level - training and travel but no salary. In the west, you need to find a way to monetize it or maybe get some private benefactors to help out.
Yes 👍
If you're not realistically going to be 2700, it seems like you have to either A) get another job, B) become a content creator and offer other chess-related services. You seem to be doing the latter reasonably well so keep up the good work!
Thank you!! 🙏
Even if you are 2700, it's not good enough to make a career purely from playing chess. E.g Guys like Shankland have to do lots of simuls, coaching and lessons
I would think a 22 year old GM can have reasonable hopes of attaining 2700 but I don't know the statistics of how often this occurs.
My favourite chess player was Jonathan Penrose, who despite being the best British player of his generation (ten times British Champion) didn’t need much convincing that there was no living to be had from chess. In those days, we were jealous of the Soviet grandmasters who were supported by the state and could play full-time. But we also knew that such a life was double-edged. Thus, Jonathan spent his entire working life as a university lecturer in psychology.
(I remain forever grateful to Jonathan and to chess for being my excuse for meeting his brother, Nobel-prize winning physicist Roger Penrose. Roger delighted in telling me that Jonathan was far and away the cleverest of the three brothers, with Oliver second and Roger third. Quite a family!).
Thanks for sharing!! 🙏
Great video! Very insightful
Glad you enjoyed it
Good video! I would add that a chess career normally finishing at around 35-40 max - and then what? In the end, I feel that becoming a GM at a young age should be the goal as a personal accomplishment - get your university degree at the same time and then enjoy a traditional working and family life.
agreed
Thank you, Mr. Rahal!
True, but I guess you could say the same about physical sports, where the career ends even earlier in most cases. One should definitely consider seeing Chess just as a hobby though, agree.
@@febloh @febloh Felix I personally think that most people in sports that are able to extend their career after up till 35-40 get paid exceptionally well to sustain their lives afterwards in a case of chess most after their primes struggle with life in general I would recommend you watching video of "hometown chess hero" he is one of the people that reacted to your this video and hear his opinion on the matter
I've been playing for four years. My rating has been climbing pretty steadily at 100 points per year. I'm already at 1200, and though there's no assurance that in sixteen more years I'll reach 2800, I think I owe it to myself to give it my best try.
2800? that is too low how about 3000 in 18 years? 😁
I live in Lithuania and not many events where they give money prizes.
I think this is the case for most sports. Take handball a reasonably popular sport. There are very few players that can make a living on playing handball. Probably only players in the top leagues. Those are the leagues in Germany, France and Spain. Perhaps also in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Hungary (but I doubt that all players in these leagues can make a living of playing).
In most video games it is impossible to make a living off playing. Only games I can think of are Dota, Counter-Strike and League of Legends but it is only a tiny percentage of players. Most players that are on professional level have to make a living off coaching and/or content creation. It's a general problem for "smaller" sports, and especially games, in the west.
If you'd ask me, I think this is a consequence of how people are "overworked" in the west and don't have time to develop interests in different sports or games. Most people just watch football, or any other of the major sports and don't usually enjoy "games" (board- or videogames). In return public interest is low for these niche games (chess is one of them) and capitalists don't want to sponsor a sport that will not generate revenue (since public interest is low). We live in a predatory society, so as long as capitalists can't make a profit, these games/sports will not survive.
Great observations!
What do you think of Magnus and Hikaru efforts to change chess? They want it to be more economical for players. Quicker time formats, esport direction, freestyle chess more exiting and dynamic etc. What is your thoughts? A video about that perhaps?
I think it's great, that they are trying. Might make follow up videos!
Agree with each and every word of yours, and i love the way you present these not so much talked topics. Also ignore the hate, if any in comments!🤞🏼
A friend of mine once saw a formar Brazilian chess champion selling ties on the street downtown São Paulo
Who was it? 😁
To be fair, you've still got the better end of the deal. You wouldn't want to live in Uzbekistan.
Absolutely true
Well, I don't think it comes with any surprise to anyone 30+, but probably young people, choosing a career should hear that more.
American chess professionals say being a chess profession in the US sucks as well!
Probably people say it everywhere haha
IM from Russia here with an hourly rate of 100EUR for coaching. Trying to help you as much as I can bro!
@@matveygalchenko1 I appreciate it man 🙏
Thanks for this vid. I think the main problem are those who can hardly live from chess but don't stop trying (and yes you have this kind of guys in lots of other sports). To be honest I'd be absolutely fine if nobody could live from chess because there are so many lost souls that are trying hard but don't manage to. It becomes even more of a problem when they are getting old. This wouldn't be happening if anybody knew that this is a mere hobby and nothing else. I am doing chess composition and everyone out there knows that he or she will never make a living from composing and solving and everyone you meet is just full of dedication.
@@shl1683 great point. That's a true problem
magnus is marketing chess differently now with take take take, and the whole streaming set-up allows for fast paced games with commentary on top like a any other sport (soccer/basketball etc). this will surely only continue to increase in popularity and revenue in the next 5-10 years, so try to see how you can capitalise on this. good luck!
Thanks!!
Nice video. Let me add that Chess is an extremely narrow game. dedicating your life to that is insane. I used to be a pro-poker player, between IT contracts, and the glamour of being a pro soon evaporates, when you play kinda full-time. In my case, It was not a big risk, because, if I were to run bad, I could just go to the next contract. Which I would do anyway, as, after a break, it would be fun to do that, more than the game.
Thanks! Interesting to hear how that works in Poker, didn't know that.
@@febloh I understand that Joe Gallagher, an England GM switched from pro chess to poker.
@@febloh Yes, poker has declined, the golden age was the circa the Noughties, and the Chris Moneymaker boom. Now, everyone is too good at it for it to be a good living. It's fun as a hobby, of course, if you're not trying to pay the bills. (And, online, AI bots are a huge problem, also). I've heard it said of golf too. When paying your mortgage depends on playing great, the fun goes out of it, it's stress. I guess it's the same with most games and sports, when you're having to succeed, or you're doomed.
As a kid, I briefly took lessons from a former tennis pro who peaked somewhere near the top 200-100. He had to quit playing because he was struggling to make minimum wage. I think this is a problem in most sports outside of, say, football, basketball, etc., which have massive global fanbases.
I'd say the elefant in the room is where the money is supposed to come from. Either chess (as a form of entertainment for viewers) has to generate the money or sponsors have to provide it. In either case, average middle european salaries for lets say all 2650+ players seems almost impossible to allocate. I feel like the "more rapid and blitz" angle makes sence, but even the most optimistic version of this would still be orders of magnitude bellow the needed funds.
Very good and important video that shows how the priorities are set in Most of the EU Countrys. Instead of support this wonderful sport and present it as a role model for the young people, you hear practically nothing in the media about the brilliant players we have.
Thanks for this video I think this video is very important to show to younger player or people who want to get into chess as a career it is extremely hard to make money with it unless you are in the top of the top or living in certain countries chances to make money to survive on is very low problem what I find about chess being considered as a Sports I would classify it as a mind game players in other sports usually if you are a professional you can make a living playing the game but chess that is not the case many players even Gms need to do coaching or make online chessable courses to play the bills the fact that someone is a professional in a field and cannot make a living with it I find that something is wrong with how chess is run cause if your a professional at the game you should be able to make a living with it.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'm glad you liked the video!
Hi, move to Cape Town South Africa. Cost of living much less expensive. It is a beautiful city with a very strong chess culture. You will be able to make a decent living from coaching. Most of the SA Olympiad team lives in Cape Town as well.
I see your point, but I think it's important to consider that most tournaments are held in Europe, which makes it much easier for Europeans to attend especially since the cost is relatively low for them. But for someone from countries like China or India, the cost of international travel can be prohibitive, not to mention the visa fees and other expenses. Also, words like "nerd" or "geek" are often seen as negative or embarrassing in Europe and North America, but in many Asian cultures, similar terms are actually considered flattering and a sign of respect for someone's intellect.
I'm from Sri Lanka, and I follow Indian chess closely. For example, the Indian chess Olympic team received US$836,000 in gift from their government. Players like Gukesh have benefited from tax exemption for his world championship prize money and received substantial financial backing, with his state government giving him $625K. Even his high school gifted him an e-class Benz.
Nice video. The problem, like you mentioned, is the recognition of chess. It's supply and demand. If there was a pay TV deal for chess worth billions, chess players would earn more. I would say despite the tradition and cultural influence of chess the interest level of the general population is closer to something "fringe" like Magic the Gathering than to tennis. Tennis and golf, two sports where the top can live off prize money suffers a similar fate like chess if you go down the totem pole. Players outside the elite level will absolutely make their living as coaches. The ecosystem supports more pure players but at some point there's a cutoff.
If you think about some other sports, there's not even the coaching option as that's most lucrative for individual sports. At least chess is in a pretty good position here because coaching can happen online and there's a decent pool of people who want to improve at the game. I do agree that coaching rates in Europe are surprisingly low.
Unfortunately chess in it's typical tournament form is rather boring to normal viewers. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed the candidates and world championship but "3-6h for a draw" is not a great pitch. I completely agree with you that rapid and blitz is the way to go.
Sadly, 30k is not sustainable. You should consider other options. The GM title is at least a cultural benefit when it comes to job seeking (in the U.S. a GM title is often a good way to get into elite universities as well). I think you should at least think about the option of another career or maybe devote some of your time to go in that direction (Fernuni etc.). At least consider a half-time job and reduce chess by 50%.
One thing I need to say... Right on the first minutes you say.. "chess career"...it might already be a missunderstanding of what career means. Career is the development of a professional expertise while exercising something for which "someone" is willing to pay for. Most careers are service oriented. Which means you exchange something that you can do well against a payment that someone would be willing to pay for. It is very important to understand this.. chess itself is not a career. It is just a challenging game that people play. Anything that involves making it into a career you will see that the monetary value is only based on what people are willing to pay to watch. Sports requiring a lower level of IQ which are just physical like football have a larger audience and pay more for that reason. Hence the real issue is the marketability and audience. Also unlike other sports, people are only interested to know who is the strongest player. They are not interested to know who is stronger. This path is certainly the toughest and most gruelling and life consuming endeavour that exists...and potentially the least rewarding.
Regarding country recognition: this is strongly tied to nationalism. Europe is basically an agglomerate of many countries..
I don't see how your last sentence makes sense (connecting to the sentence that came before). Europe is an agglomerate of many countries just like North America is, what difference does that make? Many countries in the continent have populations that are very nationalist. I agree that countries recognizing their champions in sports is tied to nationalism, and that Europe has some of the least nationalist people on earth, but the fact that there are many countries in the continent has nothing to do with nationalism. There are also many countries in Africa and a lot of them show a very strong sense of nationalism
Europe is BASICALLY an agglomerate of many countries. It IS an agglomerate of many countries. Its a continent.
@@jad_crafting basically, more like merely. Hence diluted "nationalism".
@@TheTTax No champion is ever called "european" champion in Europe.. sounds more like the champion within Europe..there is no such thing as "european" as a distinct country.. while there is such a thing as "american" as a distinct country...
@@jad_crafting yes, I never said it wasn't. just that this fact is irrelevant to explain why countries recognize or not their chess players. in Europe, in other sports, some countries recognize their players/teams. This has nothing to do with the fact that there are many countries in the European continent.
I just noticed your channel GM Felix. The thing is I noticed this video of yours, thanks, at the time of 1:30am here in New Zealand. I was intrigued to hear of your historical references, in which I have an avid interest in/for same. I now know some dates and occurrences, although initially this was something I didn't pay much attention to when I was a schoolboy in Dunedin. I wish to ask if you're interested in being interviewed for my chess channel on Chess & Life according to...? Let me know if you so wish, I can pay juniors or similar locally, or other. Anyway, on the video side of things, herewith, I think it to be a very fair appraisal, and I at my lower level of chess, find that in/at a tournament, one ends up leaving, even if done well, and then there's a low point to event, especially if when away, no one of the introverts, ends up inviting me round for... So well done on your truths, which reminds me of a Grandmaster I interviewed, who said, a little different than what you mention, that once he became a GM, then soon after things returned to normality. I often say, even if I don't particularly mean it, that chess is just a game. And it is really, that's probably the issue at hand. Yes, for those that attend a club or similar at least, it's deemed good for that person, but overall, especially in a country such as mine, there's far better things to do in NZ than chess. The GM ended up stating without prompt, that the real importance for him, is that of his faith, if I may say same, which for me was extraordinary to hear. I wish you all the best with your profession and further successes in the chess arena. Magnus (At Oslo interview late last year) is of course speaking about more crowd involvement and participation, going the kind of Boxing Chess way. I don't personally appreciate this idea, and never have, even though I could do a bit of boxing, if I really needed to, but rather not thanks GM Nigel. Regards, and Happy New Year 2025. I best now get off to bed.
Glad you liked the video! For interview inquiries, please reach out through my website:) thank you!
@@febloh Thank you GM Felix, I really appreciate the response. I hope Europe temperatures are treating you ok. Regards Dave NZ.
No, this is awesome, the real deal, real life! Much appreciated. The last time I read anything real and honest about chess life in Europe was from a US IM who went to Hungary. The organizers asked him if he wanted girls for tourist walks or girls willing to do more!
I'm a lowly Canadian National Candidate Master (FIDE 2055) with a few GM scalps like GM Pia Cramling in a Vancouver simul. But I have a good job and run my own company on the side with annual income just under $150,000 before tax. The cost of living in Canada is also very high and president Trump is about to make it worse.
This video will help many people considering turning pro. Well-done Felix.
@@westcoastlandscapepro I'm really glad that you think that it'll help some people, thank you!!
Keep going 💪 you are amazing 💜
more than financial aspect what i understood here is Europe needs community spirit that celebrates even small wins in tournaments only then it will understand how hard the big tournaments are. one doesn't need much money to acknowledge somebody's hard work. just an example, when my 6 yr old sister got elo 1100 we all made sweets for entire neighborhood, this for many may not be a big achievement but that recognition was important to her to push her to her current elo of 1800. Here chess just a competitive game but more like a cultural tradition. btw love how honest this video is ❤
Well said!! Thanks:)
This discussion highlights an important aspect of professional sports: success and income are largely determined by market demand, which is a natural result of capitalism. It’s not just about skill or dedication but how many tickets you sell and how much interest you generate.
Take soccer as an example. Even semi-professional players can make a decent living because lower-tier games still attract sizable crowds and generate revenue. Compare this to chess, which, despite its intellectual appeal, doesn’t have the same widespread spectator interest.
A similar comparison can be drawn between the NBA and WNBA. Both feature incredible athletes, but the income disparity between male and female players is staggering. Interestingly, WNBA players actually receive a higher percentage of league revenues compared to their NBA counterparts, yet their absolute earnings are much lower because the league itself generates far less revenue. This reflects audience interest, not unfair pay structures.
Sports, while entertaining, don’t necessarily provide societal value beyond entertainment. If a sport doesn’t generate enough interest or revenue, it seems unreasonable to expect taxpayers to subsidize it. Many taxpayers work in jobs that are far from enjoyable, and they shouldn’t be responsible for funding a lifestyle that relies on niche interest.
In the end, this isn’t about fairness but about how capitalism naturally prioritizes what the majority values. It might not feel ideal, but it’s the system we operate in.
Great explanation. Couldn't agree more
I respectfully disagree. First of all, there is definitely potential to charge more than 30 EUR/h for a lesson as a GM. Yes, we Eastern Europeans charge less, but even here it's not totally uncommon for strong players to charge 40-50 EUR/h. High quality is always rewarded, it's not like all chess learners pick the cheapest offer all the time. Second, even though chess is a very popular game, it's still just a game. With the exception of football (and maybe few other sports and games), you can't really expect to make a living from it unless you are in top 50 or so in the world. And yet you said you were able to earn around 30k last year which should be more than a minimum wage in Austria if I am not mistaken. If I could earn a minimum wage in my poor country (which is comical compared to Austrian minimum wage), I'd be happy to quit my full-time job and do chess instead. I know it doesn't look or feel that way, but you ARE living the dream, bro. Just think about it for a second. You can feed and house yourself by just playing and teaching chess. I understand that 30k doesn't feel right given your obvious intelligence and presumably the huge amount of effort you invested, but you gotta appreciate what you have achieved already. And if you are still worried, just come to the Balkans and live like a king with that income.
Agree on many points. I am also very grateful for everything and can live nicely, as I said in the video.
The video is more to inform people, who maybe are not aware of the financial struggles Grandmasters often face, when purely making a living from playing tournaments.
@febloh Sure thing, I don't think you are ungrateful, just wanted to point out that you have already achieved a lot :) You're on a good path, just keep doing it and don't worry too much about the future
@П.С-й4о thanks!! 🙏
Precisely why I live in Tbilisi and not in my former city of Vancouver. I can live comfortably solely on 1000€ here , in Vancouver I would need to work at least an extra 20 hours a week in order to survive .
I agree with you mostly, just small addition though. For players say from india it's very difficult to come to Europe and play if no one is sponsoring you. Often huge sacrifices are made by parents of the players involved. Yes rewards are far more but only small percentage of players get it.
Over all good points made. Specially how little that German player got. 3000 euro is actually far less than what I make in Germany per month.
Thanks for pointing that out, forgot to mention it in the video.
@febloh on the other hand though, lots of Indian companies hire sport personalities and give them salary so that they can just focus on sports and not worry about earning money.
This is very nice cushion to have. This is not present in other countries. If companies in other countries also did this, it would promote sports a lot like now it does in India.
I believe the main problem is that economics education is still pretty much absent from the West, otherwise we'd all have gone through a chapter or two on the "starving artist" phenomenon while we're still 10 years old and would have time to work out some strategies, perhaps at the personal level by getting early sponsors, or the societal with something like Universal Basic Income so at least the rent would be paid, then we could figure things out. The USA in all it's greed has the college scholarships that extend an athlete's or artist's "childhood", so they can consolidate their skills and figure out what business model might work for them, and even some extra generous sponsors that can't be found in Europe, probably because of the overall stagnation and conservatism of the Old Continent. I guess starvation will have to remain an integral part of creation, otherwise we're all going to be sellers of nonsense products like Levy's courses and t-shirts. You're even a bit lucky at the 2600 level, there's even more of a pile up at 2500 where income might be 5000 euro a year and the constant dilemma of "go all in or not"!
That´s all very interesting to hear. Can you make more videos with your shirt off?
Well said 👏. We hope to get support in Europe too. But how and who can find sponsers for good players. If we atleast start getting some sponsorship to travel and stay all over , that is also an improvement. Rich people should come forward to help and support 😢. Ofcourse prize money is aso important. Dilema to continue chess or quit.
This video was a bold move and I really really like your honesty! Though I'm not surprised by these facts (and experiencing simular problems on my own field), it's pretty sad that this beautiful game is not valued & paid enough. I guess you know as well, but things are even worse here in Hungary - our nr. 1 player Richard Rapport switched federation because even as a top player he still earned minimum wage (ridiculous amount even by hungarian standards) and just simply couldn't finance his career. I think in a sense you're lucky though because coaching & content creation is really not for everyone but you seem to be comfortable with both. Since you're around that age, have you ever considered going to college? A lil history correspondence course maybe? 😊 I'm only wondering because being a student comes with so many benefits, it gives you time to see how things are going and maybe opens up other possibilities as well. Not that I would ever recommend you to give up chess, I have huge respect for you for mastering something at such a high level under so many years, and I don't think your point with this video was to recieve advices from strangers on how to live your life anyways. 😀
Thanks Linda! I'm actually positively surprised, I thought I was gonna get much more hate 😅
It's such a shame, that the situation in Hungary is so bad, considering all the Chess Legends your country has brought forward.
I though about and I'm still thinking about studying at university, but would only do it if the education is actually good, not just for the certificate.
But for now I'm really happy pursuing Coaching, Content Creation and Playing on the side :-)
There are no professional players in Austria because you don't get paid the salary by your club or the country monthly.
Classical chess will always remain interesting to 1.4 billion people in India for a couple of reasons.
We already have a format in cricket known as Test Cricket which goes for 5 days and each day the game goes on for 7-8 hrs and if both teams play well, the match may well end up being a draw as well on the end of 5th day.
Also, India definitely has this hero worship culture. We see it reflected in our politicians,celebs,athletes,etc and i definitely see it spreading to some of the biggest indian talents like Gukesh,Pragg,etc.
Also, I was watching this lecture by a professor in a western university and he was talking about why cricket never became big in the US and why it probably wont become big ever in the US. I think his logic applies to chess as well. If you look at the most commoly followed sports in the US, they are NBA and NFL and others as well. And when there is a draw, you dont stop the game because you have to have a winner and a loser. So we go into overtime. Classical chess does not offer that unfortunately.
Also its a cultural thing as well. What does Bush say - You are either with us or against us. Its friends or foes. Whereas both cricket and chess are gentlemanly sports. There is no shouting yelling or overt celebrating in your opponents faces. We dont quite have the Conor Mcgregor equivalent in our sport yet.
Also the with us or against us mindset does not deal well with the gray. Its very black and white and there is no room to maneuver.
Couple more reasons could be demographics and Academic and Scientific excellence. Europe and the western world had great demographics in the 19th century and they were at the front of cutting edge technology,research,inventions,etc.
Now the case is different for both demographics and scientific/academic temper. The demographics we all know and i feel like, i dont know about europe but we have data that an influencer/youtuber is higher up on the list of professions young people want to pursue. I wonder if that could be leading to a fall in interest in chess as well.
India has the demographics, we have always be super obsessed with education, academic excellence especially in STEM. Also our history has these wonderkids in maths,science,astronomy. We have so many human calculators, people who are math prodigies,etc. There is a level of respect of intellect in India which is much much higher than anywhere else.
Not sure how much of the above is totally true but the above are some observations i definitely think can be thought through.
Let me know what you think about the above reasons.
At the end of the day its a game. Formats other than blitz are boring for regular viewers, even people who play the game.
Bobby Fischer described problems with chess perfectly - its all about memorization and preparation. That holds true even more now.
I rarely play or watch chess and when I do, its Hikaru, Gotham or someone like that who has the personality and can talk about something other than chess when they play.
Agree
Some audio issues.
I'm not that informed, but if you want to pivot into another career, I'm sure the skills you learned from chess and the discipline required can help you. I read about many former chess players that became investment banking for example & if you want to go to uni, being a GM is a strong extracurricular skill that might count as a special merit even if you don't have the grades necessary in some universities.
True 👍
Yeah, when cost of living goes up significantly and prizes stay the same it's a problem. Same for the ordinary workers who get paid 1K-2K a month, they feel it too. Blame inflation. Blame the goverment. Blame FIDE. It sucks i know.
At least you have the option to teach and create content. Imagine a bookkeeper who makes 1,5K a month what he can do? Can he run a youtube channel or teach bookkeeping for additional income?
Current economic situation sucks for everybody, not just chess players.
Do you know if there´s any possibility of getting a scholarship in the US? I think you can capitalize on the system of chess, that you dont need to do as well as you did last year (cof cof tennis, if you dont defend your points here goes the ranking). It gives you more versatility, bc maybe one day if you choose to have children you wont want to be as much active, idk.
Yeah, I got some scholarship offers, but I love living in Europe! I guess it sounded like I hate it here but that's not the case at all 😅 I wanna try building a sustainable business with chess for the next few years and if it doesn't work out, I could still turn to University, that's my strategy:)