Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Feature : Play for money


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1

    knamit01

    The basic idea -

    The players decide if they want to play for money. They and only they contribute to the sum at stake (equally). The amount should have a upper and lower limit. Also each player should have a credibility rating - ie, if the player lost, what was the percentage of times the player paid up the amount. chess.com can provide a completely separate option to play for money.

    what is in it for chess.com? it receives a part of the amount from the winner of the game for hosting the game.

    what is in it for the players? money ofc plus credibilty ratings.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #2

    dchurchill

    Chess.com, home of $10,000 centaur games.  Sounds good to me.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #3

    whirlwind2011

    Gambling on Chess.com? This department is for improving the site, not worsening it! Tongue Out

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #4

    knamit01

    whirlwind2011 wrote:

    Gambling on Chess.com? This department is for improving the site, not worsening it! 

    How is it gambling? If it was, the rated players would not play for money. Chess is not based on probability or forecasting. It is a logical strategy game. you control the outcome of a game based on your choices of moves.

    Gambling is something whose outcome is based on probability (chances) and is not definite. Moreover, the beneficieries are only the players and the game host directly.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #5

    ivandh

    Wagering money on the outcome of any game is gambling. At any rate there is enough whingeing about cheaters, this would just wreak havoc.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #6

    neo-metacrash

    chess.com gambling is going to drain peoples life away, like real life gambling, and my friend Erik could get in some legal trouble. (Sorry)

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #7

    Snar

    no, it is a bad idea just because of the fact that chess engines are so common, and the most games would be between houdini and houdini, not between two members

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #8

    knamit01

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 2 years ago · Quote · #9

    knamit01

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 2 years ago · Quote · #10

    knamit01

    Snar wrote:

    no, it is a bad idea just because of the fact that chess engines are so common, and the most games would be between houdini and houdini, not between two members

    snar - you have a logical point. thats possible. but that is open to both sides. its again their choice of the engines. moreover since the amount at stake should be  small, it should not really matter. also chess.com ensures that already to prevent the bad guys from all kinds of hacking.  they already are doing a great job

    edit: game formats also can filter that possibilty out

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #11

    knamit01

    ivandh wrote:

    Wagering money on the outcome of any game is gambling. At any rate there is enough whingeing about cheaters, this would just wreak havoc.

    @ivandah - By your definition of gambling, all game tournaments (where the winner wins the prize money) are gamble? In this case the tournament is between two ppl..

     

    edit: Yeah cheaters are always there. you cannot control the intentions of a bad guy.thats teh reason for setting up the credibility ratings (i have mentioned this above). Also i have mentioned to cap the amounts (may be small) so that it is actually practical

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #12

    whirlwind2011

    @OP: Small amounts would quickly add up to large amounts. People addicted to gambling would have extreme difficulty stopping the betting.

    To deny that this is gambling is delusional. The game of Chess is purely skill, but many agree that some luck is involved, nonetheless. Factors beyond either player's control remain. If one player is having a good or bad day, this is an intangible that, from the point of view of the other player, is lucky.

    Accidental disconnections also diminish the focus on skill, consequently raising the luck factor.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #13

    johnyoudell

    Modest amounts sounds good.  Prize funds are a very usual way to introduce money into the game so how about it knamit01, can you put up something modest?  A thousand Euro would attract a good entry I imagine.

    I'm sure the site will be willing to call the event "the knamite01 trophy" or something commemorative like that.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #14

    linuxblue1

    I came here to avoid gambling harems like chess.cube.

    pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeee. sigh.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #15

    AlCzervik

    Hmmm, not one comment yet about it being illegal...

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #16

    netzach

    Indeed which is why at chesscube the play is for tokens.

    Gambling elswhere strictly-regulated and differs according to country. Not a good-idea for this site.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #17

    NimzoRoy

    This sounds like a real bad idea IMHO. And the US govt is not in favor of online gambling as far as I know.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #18

    VanillaBean

    "@ivandah - By your definition of gambling, all game tournaments (where the winner wins the prize money) are gamble? In this case the tournament is between two ppl.."

    The difference is a third party offers prize money to the winner, the two players aren't wagering their own money.  Chess.com offers prize money to Death Match Players.  That's winning a prize, not gambling.  

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #19

    MoonlessNight

    Just call it one game tournament!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #20

    blake78613

    AlCzervik wrote:

    Hmmm, not one comment yet about it being illegal...

    Because it is not illegal.  Chess is considered a game of skill.  Many tournaments have entry fees and Prizes, this is legal because games of skill are not considered gambling.


Back to Top

Post your reply: