at the mercy of the arbiter

[Nigel_Davies]

Do you see Grandmasterly pride as being hugely more odious than showing off one's dosh via personalised number plates? A lot of people seem to be affected by all such things, perhaps feeling that their noses are being rubbed into their own disappointments.

I think it largely depends on how it manifests itself.

I've just removed the GM1 ACE number plate from my shopping list.

[TomChivers]

Earlier someone commented about how respected Mickey Adams was - is this really true? England having secured a new sponsor (LV) were in contention for a medal at the Olympiad, but Mickey needed a second rest day in a row (against Russia). Is this professional, or worthy of respect - well, not in my opinion.

Alright then, I raise you Jonathan Rowson. I don't know anyone who dislikes him. (Well, I know one person who does, but the reason is so stupid it makes them seem like an idiot.)

[Justin Hadi]

Rowson is not really a professional chess player, he's more of an author/phd student.

[TomChivers]

Rowson is not really a professional chess player, he's more of an author/phd student.

If we're being that strict, then I guess Britain only has one fully professional chess player ---- Michael Adams? And I would say he's still popular and respected, despite the Olympiad thing. Oh, maybe there's two ---- the other being David Howell.

[Justin Hadi]

I would say:

Hebden, Bogdan Lalic, the forum's own Nigel Davies (no day job?) , Short (although he lives in Greece plays a few events in the UK) and Keith used to play a lot of games as well.

[TomChivers]

But Nigel Short also earns from writing and teaching, doesn't he, and I would think the bulk of ND's income comes from the same? (Or the financial trading he blogs about?) Don't know about the others.

[Justin Hadi]

I was saying that Rowson has a day job - his PhD. Short etc, main income seems to be from chess and also play a lot. Some GMs/IMs write/teach a lot more than play. Didn't know about ND and financial trading blog, potentially that could earn a lot more, but you might find your office broken into by G20 protesters.

Also I agree with you on Adams, he seems to be a nice guy and well respected - did a simul last year somewhere in the UK.

[Nigel_Davies]

I would say:

Hebden, Bogdan Lalic, the forum's own Nigel Davies (no day job?) , Short (although he lives in Greece plays a few events in the UK) and Keith used to play a lot of games as well.

Unfortunately I must mainly work for a living (books, DVDs, teaching etc) though I do make a bit of beer whilst trying to keep my hand in. I was trading from 2003-2007 but am currently dormant. N

[Jonathan Rogers]

This is getting a bit silly. It is very hard to succeed in such a competitive world as chess without having to assert yourself or make yourself (at least, temporarily) unpopular among a certain section in some way or other. That is to say nothing of the occasional misdemeanour just caused by general mental pressure. I should think that very few GMs have managed this - certainly not all of those named above - and in some cases I would have sympathy with those who have made themselves unpopular sometimes.

I can think of comparable examples as a chess captain. In 1999/2000, a team called Invicta Knights Home House (an amalgamation of two previous teams) played in the first division of the 4NCL. It was badly organised that year, in the same way that Home House had been badly organised in the previous year (but for the record, the following year it would be sponsored by Beeson Gregory, and captained by Chris Howell, and would win it) . By round seven IKHH were still not better organised; worse, in fact, and they turned up against Barbican 4NCL 1 with no one knowing even the full composition of the team, let alone its board order. (Its then captain was not there, and had not thought to mail or fax his team through directly to the arbiter the night before). So some one in their team had to guess their team list, and they naturally made one mistake - they thought that Demis Hassabis would play when in fact Neil McDonald was due to play instead. I myself was due to play Hassabis. Since McDonald was not on their team sheet even as a reserve, I could refuse to play him and claim the default win.

What would you do? I was annoyed and claimed the win. It also helped us to win the match quite comfortably (and it not easy being a playing captain in the 4NCL at the best of times. Everything you do is for the team, rather than for yourself, in any event; and so it would perhaps have been odd for me not to have taken a default win). And I bought Neil a drink, instead of playing a game against him. Neil did not object, but a number of his team mates abused me for my "unsporting" decision. I still think I was right, in those particular circumstances, and I recall that Brian Smith and the late Richard Furness also told me at the time that they were pleased to see someone take a stand against this sort of "what's our team?" nonsense in the 4NCL.

Still, I was unpopular in certain quarters, and I don't envy people such as Keith who may need to make similar stands as part of their livelihood.

[JustinHorton]

So they might, but it would be a prodigious leap of logic which assumed that taking stands for important reasons, in a reasonable if forthright manner, was necessarily what people have in mind if they're unhappy with this chess professional or that.

And again it's worth observing that all sorts of people find themselves taking stands at work for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes justified, sometimes not, sometimes in the right way, sometimes not. But it's not in any way particular to chess professionals.

[Matthew Turner]

It is very, very tough to make money from playing chess, but I think if you look at Mickey Adams there are two big problems for him at the moment

1. Lack of players to prepare with
2. Lack of sponsorship - this means that he is less likely to get invited to big events because big tournaments want to invite sponsored players so that they can benefit from the sponsor's publicity machines

Neither of these things is Mickey's fault and he would be much better off had he been born in France, Germany, Brazil, USA, Norway, or pretty much anywhere else in the World. It is probably a sad fact that there is very little that one person, be they Mickey Adams or Gerry Walsh! can do about this in the short run. My point is that a lot of GMs haven't helped change the situation and I gave the example of Mickey not playing against Russia in the Olympiad as something that in hardly likely to impress new sponsors. I am in no way saying that Mickey is not a nice person.

[Nigel_Davies]

I gave the example of Mickey not playing against Russia in the Olympiad as something that in hardly likely to impress new sponsors.

I imagine there was a very good reason why he wasn't playing, for example being tired or under the weather. The two consecutive rest days would seem to imply something of that ilk. N

[Keith Arkell]

Some random thoughts in response to various postings above - ie how this particular Brummy GM sees things:

I rarely take a stance on anything.It's more in my nature to ride with the punches rather than try to change anything.In other words I react rather than act.

Although I have cited 3 examples in this thread where I was wronged,in general I don't dwell on my negative experiences,and in fact in 30 years of playing chess I haven't really had much to moan about,and in any case I don't pretend to have always behaved impeccably myself.We're all human.

Most people whose paths I cross during my activities as a chess pro I find to be friendly and respectful,or at least not disrespectful.
I'm not a chess snob- for what it matters many of my best friends happen to be not that great at chess.There is something ridiculous about snobbery-whether it be based on status,money or how posh the accent.If I'm better than somone at chess I tend to assume that there is something (perhaps something more important) that they are better than me at.

Newspaper chess columns as a rule give me hell.My draws are attacked,my wins are reacted to with surprise,and my losses rarely escape publication.It's not the columnists fault.They don't understand my chess,and as a rule the columnists think I am weaker than I am;but that's not a problem-in fact it has come to amuse me - I will simply hope to continue to improve and hope it will soon reflect in my rating.

Professional players in the UK:
My definition is anybody who is able to, and chooses to, independently support him/herself mostly from prizes and appearance fees.
Some are obvious -eg Adams and Short,Conquest,Lalic,myself,Hebden.There are others of course,and there are the strong young GMs just starting out;but then you start moving into greyer areas - players who rely more heavily on coaching and/or writing.

Finally,Nigel suggests that GMs are respcted less here than anywhere else in the world.Cetainly the status of GMs is greater in the rest of Europe and eg in Russia,but having spent a lot of time in New York lately I can tell you that status there is everything,and money determines that status.Strong chess players are treated in the same class as nannies or dog-walkers,and are employed by rich people to teach their talentless 7 year olds chess basics,or, rather pointlessly,reams of opening theory. If a GM wants to play chess there he must remember to bring his clock and set and nearly always be prepared to pay all expenses himself and have his entry fee docked from his prize-even in International tournaments.

[TomChivers]

Interesting post Keith. For the purposes of the current debate in this thread ---- the treatment of chess pro's in the UK ---- should we not exclude those who live abroad, i.e. Short and Conquest (?).

[Nigel_Davies]

but having spent a lot of time in New York lately I can tell you that status there is everything,and money determines that status.Strong chess players are treated in the same class as nannies or dog-walkers,and are employed by rich people to teach their talentless 7 year olds chess basics,or, rather pointlessly,reams of opening theory. If a GM wants to play chess there he must remember to bring his clock and set and nearly always be prepared to pay all expenses himself and have his entry fee docked from his prize-even in International tournaments.

I've actually found that the GM title gets a lot of respect from New Yorkers and Americans in general, though I think they'd be baffled as to why someone would actually want to try plaing for a living. I've also had some very positive experiences with American chess students, though admittedly almost all of my private students are adults these days.

Chess tournaments seem to be viewed as something akin to poker events; everyone puts money on the table and the prizewinners take all. So I wouldn't be too quick to see this as being particularly unique to chess, it's just the American way. There are some signs it might change, for example these days the 'hustlers' in Washington Square Garden don't hustle any more, they ask for game fees irrespective of the result. I guess they've been taken to the cleaners once too often by hungry Russians.