GM Gelfand on Chinese and Indian Chess Players

In a recent interview GM Boris Gelfand was posed this question:

Q:   "Has chess changed seriously in the last 10 years? In what does that change consist, above all?"

Gelfand:  "A great deal. One of those things is what we’ve already talked about – the speed and accessibility of information has grown incredibly. The number of chess players has also grown sharply and, as a consequence, the level of knowledge and competition. If you don’t work hard you can’t win a game against anyone nowadays, and it’s become much harder to win. Plus the geography of chess has expanded greatly – now there are good masters everywhere. In general, China and India have flooded the world with their chess players: soon I think every third game in the world will be either against a Chinese or an Indian player."

It seems to me that Gelfand is serious.   Then there was a recent forum thread:  https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/losing-to-another-little-chinese-kid

Then there was a thread last year:  https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-are-there-no-white-kids-playing-chess

And the poster wrote this in his introduction:  "I want to preface this post by saying that I am welcoming of any race, color, gender or sexual orientation playing the game of chess.

That said, I have noticed that a very low number of white children compared to other ethnicity groups. Now, this could be local to my area and my chess club. It seems there are a higher number of Asian and Indian children playing.

Once again, I don't have a problem with this. I am merely curious why this is. I, myself was one of three white kids (in my county) who took chess seriously when we were much younger (around age 12)."

Several other things I've noticed.  One, in the local scholastic tournaments there is a predominance of Indian and Asian players.  (Although East Indians are arguably part of Asia, and thus Asians themselves.)

Two, I've perused the USCF rating lists for various age categories, and these top 100 lists are majority either Indian or Asian (mostly Chinese).

So then I'm thinking about GM Gelfand.  I'm assuming he doesn't come to America much.  So he doesn't really see what's going on around here in the U.S.  He's based in Europe, right?   Or Israel.  So are there really a lot of Indian and Asian Chess Players in Europe?  I mean, for him to make his observation,  "soon I think every third game in the world will be either against a Chinese or an Indian player" surprised me mildly.  I think this is a bit of exaggeration, don't you?

Of course he's exaggerating to some extent, but China + India are more than a quarter of the world's population, so maybe not that much.  I was looking at the pairings for the Sharjah Open and India has a huge contingent.

I read that the Sharjah Open isn't very far away from India by airplane, and that's a primary reason why many Indian players attended this event.

I wonder if Vishy Anand's chess boom in India is bigger than Bobby Fischer's chess boom in the United States.

I would say there is no comparison.  I think Anand has attracted many, many more people to chess than Fischer did.

You're probably right, FishEyedFool.  

Many of the East Indians here in America still have close family ties to their loved ones in India.  Leads me to think that the chess boom in India lead to the rise in Indian players in the United States.

 Yeah, here in Texas, a lot of our kids are either Chinese or Indian. I think there is also some connection in piano because my sister was saying a bunch of kids in one of her piano competitions was Chinese.

Hmmmm, chess and piano.  I think the link must be things that are considered intellectual or cerebral or academic.  For example, when I go to the doctor, be it the hospital or medical office buildings, when I scan the directory board, I see a lot of Indian names and a lot of Chinese names.

the way asian kids are raised in the u.s is kind of brutal. It's like they have their life planned for them quite early to get into top 20 schools. usually they learn to play instruments and have very advanced academic curriculum. i think perspectives on chess have changed for the positive so that rigorous chess is added to the mix.

it still amazes me just how many asians attend johns hopkins here in Baltimore where asian population is not high at all.they truly have the academia game figured out.It's the elephant in the room. model minorities.

India and China are at the very bottom of a list [bit.ly/2enJ95W] compiled in 2016 showing the number of Masters/IMs/GMs (FIDE > 2,200) per capita. India had 3 masters/10 million, China 2/10 million.

Yet, the absolute numbers make impression they are unstoppable.

Rank Country             Pop (mil.)  #Masters  #/Mill.Pop.

In fact, a small Serbia of 7 million population has more chess masters (699) than India and China combined (334 + 268 =  602 masters for a population of 2,710 million)

Give it time :-)  just the population numbers are scary.

That is an absolutely hilarious fact.  Per Capita, Iceland, Montenegro, and Serbia just kick arse.  

Sort of the Quality versus Quantity debate.  

But the Quantity of the player pool from India and China is just so HUGE, that the Quality will eventually burst forth.  But on a per capita basis, the facts are the facts.

Senior Patzer, if you think the elite, One percent, actually even less, 100-200 players in the world, than you are absolutely right. You then might be also highly impressed by the fact that 3 richest people in the nation own as much wealth as the half bottom of the population; that's fine.

It is also true that Serbia's GMs don't belong anywhere close to the top, but the number of masters show a better picture of how much the game is popular in the country; the situation is still more favorable among less skillful players.

Also, keep in mind that Serbia doesn't have any chess academies, Pioneer Palaces, any state support whatsoever. I tend to think that Chinese (Indian perhaps less so) top players have heavy financial and any other support from the State to become what they've become.

Amazing how we think differently, for you, 699 Masters in Serbia versus 602 in China and India is hilarious, to me, it is simply impressive.

So impressive that the only superlative that I could think of was "hilarious."  No offense waa intended. 

Why worry, Chess is the most democratic sport there is, with zero cost of entry, [it is actually 100% of your life) but you don’t know that going in.

There are superstars from practically every country, with of course a preponderance of Europe and Eastern Europe. But it is truly a global game,  with a huge representation from the former SSR’s like Aremenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia etc.

While Chess is popular in India, it is mainly 3-4 states that dominate, Tamilnadu, Maharashtra, Delhi, Andhra, Karnataka, West Bengal. that is about 400 mm out of 1300 million. The full flowering of Indian Chess is yet to come.  It is ingrained in the culture as a good addiction, to keep young people away from bad addictions like sloth and laziness. Hinduism places a high value on Saadhana or effort, with no expectation of reward.

We need the rest of the world falling in love with high effort, low reward activities like chess, as that is the one way to a sustainable planet. Look what all the quick buck artists have done to the world, so juvenile and short sighted!