Here is a story about some chess players being featured on a nightly news program:

 

http://www.team4news.com/Global/story.asp?S=6711690&nav=menu90_3

 

What do you think? Will we see more stories like this on the news? Will chess get more publicity on television, or will chess never become successful on television?

Hrmmmmmmmmmmmmmm................ great questions. I have thought a lot about this obviously because of Chess.com :) I'd love to see chess become more mainstream and more popular with TV coverage, etc. Truth is, I'm not sure it can ever be "the next poker", which is the example I use of something similar that HAS reached huge success in mainstream media. Here are my reasons why:

#1 You need skills. To understand GOOD chess, you need to BE good at chess. With poker, however, the rules and play are so simple and it is so easy to follow a game, who could win, etc, that someone can understand it within 5 minutes. Not with chess though - it's too subtle!

#2 It takes too long. Chess games are long with a lot of silence and sitting in a chair. In poker there are cards being dealth, money being moved around, etc.

#3 Small wins. In chess the game isn't over until it is over. In poker there are frequent moments of resolution when the particular hand is over.

#4 Chance.  With chess you win because you are better. There are no real "underdog" stories. In poker, someone who learned 3 minutes ago can believe they have a chance to win!

Those are just a few of my thoughts on it ;) 

Yeah, some good points there Erik. However, I think I must disagree with one of your points AND fully support another one.

 

#1 I don't think that you have to be good at chess to fully enjoy watching event coverage on television. I remember a few years back watching the Kasparov-Fritz matches on ESPN with commentators Maurice Ashley and Yasser Seirawan. I thought those two did a GREAT job on the commentary. They had energetic commentary which simplified many of the positions into basic explanations for a general person who just knows how the pieces move would be able to follow along with. I really think if some good, energetic, and funny commentators are found then I think live chess broadcasts (event coverage) could be quite successful on television.

 

#2 I think that the time controls of chess MUST be shortened to increase the pace of the game for it to be acceptable for television. Sadly, this will ruin the quality of the endgame play when both sides will just be in a crazy time scramble, but this is a sacrifice that must be made to have our great game and sport on television. I propose that the time control used for televised games should be 25 minutes with 5 second delay for both sides. That way there is not a 15 minute think on one move during the game when the commentators will have to struggle with one position for that long. With fast paced action like this I think people would be interested to watch. Especially when both sides are down to 1 minute left on the clock and the pieces are flying across the board at a fast and furious pace!

 

there is a 5th point I would like to add to yours. This is the aspect of humor and human interest stories from the commentators. The commentators will have to add in some humorous stories. I have often listened to the commentators on the Chess.FM radio broadcasts during live event coverage and these commentators do a great job of interjecting funny little stories about some of the players, game situations, or past chess experiences (particularly GM John Fedorowicz, "the Fed"). I think he would be great for tv chess commentating. Also there should be some personal stories about the players which will create interest in the players and actually have the observers rooting for someone. You can talk about nice things about their families, some heart-warming stories about how the players have persevered over some traumatic experience or even give some backgrouund of their chess history and their accomplishments. With these types of stories the audience will gain respect for these players and start having favorites and actually root for one player to win over the other. This would also create more spectator interest.

 

Just some of my opinions  :)

 

 

 

 

Interesting comments.  I have banged the drum before about human interest stories on other forums.

Ultimately though, I think that the internet is the perfect medium for chess and we don't need chess on TV to popularise the game.  As technology improves and PC's and TV's tend to merge into one piece of hardware, I think chess will benefit further.

Maybe you could take a 4 hr. match & edit it down to a 1 hr. show for ESPN.