Chess is boring to people that do not understand what is going on. So lets say chess gets put on televison. You will get the same people watching it there that watched it online. Chess is not audience sport. Let us use American Football as an example. Every play is a mini outcome. You do not need to understand much to know when a team is doing well. Now in chess you need a pretty big understanding to know when a player makes a blunder. Even if you are told it is a blunder, you wont understand why. Even if you are told why, it still wont make sense unless you a pretty good understanding of the game....
Just like American Football is boring to people that don't know what is going on. In fact in this paragraph, substitute "Chess" for "American Football". Understand the rules and enjoy the game. But totally irrelevant reasoning as to why a tournament should or should not be held. Those that understand and love the rules will play, while those that don't will probably stay away.
Once again this is just another tournament. The only difference is the money is bigger. Instead of putting his money into this, Ashley should have invested in having elementry schools "teach" chess. Even if it is only a few times a week. THAT is good for chess because it introduces new people to the game. That will not make him any money though. I will bet he is making a pretty penny off of this. I guarantee he is getting a percentage from the hotels if you use the code. I also bet he is finding other ways to convince people to give him some money since he is bringing business to the city.
So let's get to the real points of your argument. 1) You're jealous that he could be making money. He can do whatever he likes with his money, and make whatever tournament he wants. He probably already invests in chess development. Get over it. And 2) The regulations are bad because my chances of winning a prize are not good. ---> Improve your chess then, don't move the goalposts. Ashley certainly won't be.
I will finish with saying I like the idea of the tournament. Everyone loves big money, but this tournament is far from a big deal. It is not going to revolutionize chess. Want to know how it could though? Dont allow anyone over 2000 to play and make the rating groups only 100 points apart i.e 1900-1999, 1800-1899... then do >999. That will give you a prize fund of almost 100,000 for each group. More people will join because the rating groups are so close. Then just make rules where if you win a group you cant play in the same group next time no matter your rating. I imagine this would attract a ton of people because even people that arent very good at all could have a top prize of 40,000 0r 50,000.
Until someone tries such a tournament, what do we know about it in practice? Zip. Perhaps he will make changes for the next one, perhaps not. Maybe it will revolutionize chess. Trying to change the regulations now is not going to work, the tournament is in full swing. The great thing about this tournament is that the prizes are large. Enjoy.
You did not get the point of my analogy. You could take a day and explain American Football to someone and they will be able to watch it. You could study chess for 10 years and still not understand moves that a super GM makes.
I respect Ashley. I respect anyone who makes large sums of money off their intelligence. I am hardly jealous and I never said they should cancel the tournament. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. Ashley is not doing anything special for the sport. He is just holding a high stakes tournament.
Until someone tries anything, you will not know about it in practice. That is self explanatory. I just simply gave my opinion on a tournament idea that I feel will pull more people into playing chess.
If you are going to comment, please add something to the discussion. Do not just state obvious points. Give your opinion on why or why not the tournament is "good" for chess.
Chess is boring to people that do not understand what is going on. So lets say chess gets put on televison. You will get the same people watching it there that watched it online. Chess is not audience sport. Let us use American Football as an example. Every play is a mini outcome. You do not need to understand much to know when a team is doing well. Now in chess you need a pretty big understanding to know when a player makes a blunder. Even if you are told it is a blunder, you wont understand why. Even if you are told why, it still wont make sense unless you a pretty good understanding of the game....
Just like American Football is boring to people that don't know what is going on. In fact in this paragraph, substitute "Chess" for "American Football". Understand the rules and enjoy the game. But totally irrelevant reasoning as to why a tournament should or should not be held. Those that understand and love the rules will play, while those that don't will probably stay away.
Once again this is just another tournament. The only difference is the money is bigger. Instead of putting his money into this, Ashley should have invested in having elementry schools "teach" chess. Even if it is only a few times a week. THAT is good for chess because it introduces new people to the game. That will not make him any money though. I will bet he is making a pretty penny off of this. I guarantee he is getting a percentage from the hotels if you use the code. I also bet he is finding other ways to convince people to give him some money since he is bringing business to the city.
So let's get to the real points of your argument. 1) You're jealous that he could be making money. He can do whatever he likes with his money, and make whatever tournament he wants. He probably already invests in chess development. Get over it. And 2) The regulations are bad because my chances of winning a prize are not good. ---> Improve your chess then, don't move the goalposts. Ashley certainly won't be.
I will finish with saying I like the idea of the tournament. Everyone loves big money, but this tournament is far from a big deal. It is not going to revolutionize chess. Want to know how it could though? Dont allow anyone over 2000 to play and make the rating groups only 100 points apart i.e 1900-1999, 1800-1899... then do >999. That will give you a prize fund of almost 100,000 for each group. More people will join because the rating groups are so close. Then just make rules where if you win a group you cant play in the same group next time no matter your rating. I imagine this would attract a ton of people because even people that arent very good at all could have a top prize of 40,000 0r 50,000.
Until someone tries such a tournament, what do we know about it in practice? Zip. Perhaps he will make changes for the next one, perhaps not. Maybe it will revolutionize chess. Trying to change the regulations now is not going to work, the tournament is in full swing. The great thing about this tournament is that the prizes are large. Enjoy.