You know, thats a really good idea!

I know that internet gambling sites have been squashed in the US, but how about a chess tournament (e.g. 32 players, $1 entry, 1st place takes 70%, 2nd 30%).  Is this classed as gambling?  No raising the stakes, doubling up, or anything like that.  Any Lawyers out there that can advise?

In my way of thinking, putting up a dollar for myself so that I can play in a tournament, is a bit like me investing a dollar in my own IPO in the XXX (substitute any business arena name here) market, where all the other guys in the market are doing the same.

If legal, this would involve some serious development by the chess.com guys, but I believe it could make the chess.com site even more 'visitable' than it already is.

Ian

But,

it would be open to serious abuse, so scrub that

 Lol!  I love the amount of humor on this site that is interjected into usually serious situations.

Bend over Rael!

Rael,

1. Chess is a game founded on technique and learning, if a player can't handle that, they should probably look for another game, that doesn't include either of those two concepts.

2. My second remark was a direct reply to your insinuation. So, don't play whiter than white with me, it doesn't wash.

3. Chill out man! Who made you our moral guardian? Get off your high horse.

as to the beauty of chess (instead of simple fun), the main thing you gain by increasing your knowledge is seeing much more finesses, much more beauty,  like studying math and physics brings you ability to understand and be astonished by many things that other people see at much lower level, I can witness the difference is large.

It is scary knowing there are still people out there who would like to burn books.

excellent answer! bravo!

If indeed I had not learned ,say math,from the experience of others,I may well think 2+2=5.Even the best of the best walked on the shoulders of those before them.

Personally, I find Chessica's view refreshing, and mockery of Chessica's post only reenforces Chessica's points of view.  It (mockery) also serves to discourage new players by belittling their opinions, of which, they have as much right to express as anyone else, especially if the forum doesn't know the age and playing ability of the contributor.  Haven't thought about it much previously, but I know my game needs a "Pooh-stick" quite often.   

As mentioned previously, chess is a game which I would wager even Chessica learned to play from someone with previous experience. The game has been "handed down" by others about 1,500 years. In fact, we know a lot about the history of chess from written documentation and imagery in art work throughout the centuries.  We have learned a great deal from documentation of previous games, learning how our earlier ancestors played the game.

Isn't it fair to say that even if we are to play by spontaneity alone, aren't we still learning from the skills and errors in each of our games?  

Like it or not, the fact is that chess is a game of progressive skill.  If a player doesn't learn from his or her own mistakes, or by watching or reading from others, then are we not sentencing ourselves to hypocrisy?  That is to say, Chessica, that whether players read and study chess (moves) of other players, and even if we are left to seek our own strategies, won't our playing abilities progress by our own experiences of trial and error?  Won't these experiences be communicated to our next opponent(s), as well as learned by ourselves, one way or another?  

I can empathize with Chessica regarding the overwhelming abilities within the game, and disliking opposing drooling, bloodthirsty attitudes out for a kill, which, I too, find difficult to rationalize as "sportsmanlike".  The same goes for caustic ridicule of another player's opinion.  I can agree with Chessica in that regard, but as for progressing in any game, sport, or other facet of life, life is often said to be "a learning experience."  I just don't see how we can prevent ourselves from learning from others, and others from us, Chessica, can you?

I, for one, appreciated Chessica's post, and the various responses.  Won't we all be learning something from our shared views?  I believe Chessica will reconsider, but we can be grateful the forum provided a good learning experience for all.  "The Great Pooh" has spoken.

I think he/she only wishes this game could be more "fair" , with everybody starting with the same chances, including knowledge, she would like to have a game where the only requirements were one's natural skill, and that nobody could overplay others because of using learnt moves or strategies from a book. i guess it would be fair in a sense, but then again, as others pointed out, chess advances with this kind of learnt knowledge, and after all, two can play the same game chessica, grab some book and study some openings/defences and you'll be on the same conditions that other players, or maybe above. it hasn't to be boring nor take a long time, in fact, you could even find fun in researching openings.

Two other reflections regarding your concern, Chessica, is that chess, as most players realize, is much like life.  We go to school throughout our lives to be able to apply classroom learning to real life.  It's generally thought that those who do better in life are those who have done well in school, though we know that isn't always the case.  Just like in school, there are bullies and those who make fun of us while we're learning, but we also make some of our best lifelong friends there, too, and chess is no exception.  Some aggravators enjoy showing their natural human misbehavior which the rest of have to learn to deal with until they realize they aren't "the smartest knives in the drawer" -- that there's always a bigger or more cunning adversary who will eventually squash them and make them look stupid. A smart player knows how fallible he or she is.  You would think they would have learned this from playing chess.      

Secondly, about learning chess from books, viewing other games, DVD's, etc.  I'm sure there are many chess players who see the seeming futility of learning strategies which are already played and proven.  But isn't that the way life is, too?  We go through the same steps as most people, experience many of the same joys and sorrows as everyone else, step in the same mud puddles, yet we have to learn to do it to live. With chess, we can experience many of the fascinations others have, but we have a belief, that with all of the possible combinations, that we might do better than our predecessors.  To some players, the 'win' is a boost of ego and builds their self-esteem.  To other players, going through the motions of chess builds concentration and tests our mental agility, even though we may have studied the game for a long time.  How often do we find that school fails to prepare us for many of life's challenges?  The same is true of studying chess.  

There are so many combinations in chess, that even with study, again, as in life, we'll never know it all.  As with any human competition, and, again, life, the chess player learns to take advantage of opportunity from availability, human error, ineptness, or position.  As in life, some people are born to wealth, others to poverty, yet each must learn to negotiate within their environment.  It seems harsh, but it's reality.  At least on the chessboard, everyone begins, basically, with the same material strength, though I know there are some arguments for white's advantage.  (Today, I'm surprised someone hasn't called chess a "racist game".)

Here's another point about studying chess in advance of the game.  In school, we study history at all educational levels so that humankind learns from it's past.  I've forgotten the contributor, but it's been said that those who fail to learn from the past are destined to repeat it.  I think you will agree that this is also the true of chess.  I think all players, sooner or later, fall into some of the same traps because we are human and forget.  Remember, there is some form of human error in every game, one side more than the other.

I hope what I've written here adds some clarity to your frustration.  I, too, wish life wasn't as cruel as it often is, at times.  Many of us do.  But some good advice to coping with life, and you've no doubt heard this, learn when dealt lemons, make lemonade.  

   While chess can seem ugly, cruel, aggressive, tedious, and a lot more, it can also be beautiful in the way the moves produce a logical and natural sequencing of priorities.  The strategies can appear intricate as art work.  

Each chess player has their reason(s) for playing the game, and each player takes with them what they are able to see in it.  As with life, either we drink lemonade, or try to find a more suitable drink.  My experience is, after a lot lemonade and all things considered, chess offers a lot more flavor than most other options. We all have decide what suits us.

Thanks for taking the risk to post your frustration.  I believe you expressed a valid criticism. 

Learning through reading books and/or experiences isn't cheating.  It's natural for a person to seek for progress.

Some really in depth responses...  I honestly thought Chessica was making a joke with this post.  evil?  The very essence of what makes chess fascinating is learning how your mistakes work and graduating from one level to the next.  As ozzie claypot put it "becoming less incompetent".  

If we were to sit at every chessboard with the same knowledge we had the first time we sat down...maybe that would be like an IQ test?  

I think the idea to play Fischer Random might be best if that's your inclination.  If this original post is at all serious.  

This is what is wrong with allot of people in the world today. They think that everytime someone beats them at something they are trying to bring down there "self-confidence" instead of sportsmanly admitting that they are not as good. If you are just playing for fun then losing won't bring down your self-confidence anyway. So Chessica if you are playing just for fun then lighten up. Some people (including myself) think that chess is a beautiful game, and want to learn all the nuiances of the beautiful game that they can. They are not evil; just simply of another mindset than yourself. Thanks for your time, and I apologize if I was a little hard on you Chessica. No hard feelings.