IM Shankland quitting chess

4th annual Philadelphia International 

9 round Swiss System, 40/2, SD/1, Valley Forge Convention Center (and Scanticon & Radisson Hotels), 1160 1st Ave, King of Prussia PA 19406.  Free parking.  See World Open for directions. 

Guaranteed prize fund $7000: $2000-1200-800-600-400-300-200, top FIDE under 2300 or unrated $1000-500.  
Minimum prize if completing all games with no byes: $600 to foreign GMs, $300 to foreign IMs & foreign WGMs.  
IM & GM norms possible; FIDE rated.  (Not really)

That's bold, and nice to hear from an IM. I think along the same lines, but it's much easier for me to say these kind of things since I'm not a professional chess player and higher GM standards would never affect me.

It seems to me, specially after seeing that video, that some talented players feel entlited to the GM title (yeah, that sounded awkward), like if belonging to the top tier of players is just a question of time and opportunity. From what I've been reading about ratings inflation, if nothing is done, within some years a GM title will lose its distinction value, since the skill difference between the best and the worst GM is increasingly larger. Maybe it's time to think of some new GM standarsds or to create a new title for top players altogether.

Well, I think he already got that norms

http://main.uschess.org/content/view/6425/354/

http://main.uschess.org/content/view/7992/420/

Both in France : )

Can deep pockets (i.e., greenbacks) help the cause of chess in the US, including the production of more US grandmasters? 

I don't think that's really even a question.

Dollars can work not only through more norm-friendly events but through the general promotion of chess.

Promotion is a complex question, and I'm not qualified to really comment on that topic, but look at what Rex Sinquefield and his team in St. Louis have been able to achieve in just two years.  I don't know the breadth of Sinquefield's vision for chess in the US, but people like him have the political clout and social contacts that can make chess known (and appealing) to a broader community.

Does Shankland need to play GMs to become a GM?  Of course.  But I can also totally understand the frustration he must feel at plying his art in a society at large which essentially ignores chess. 

I suppose I would say that while I understand Sam's complaints at the requirements for norms, and perhaps were I in his shoes it would be quite a natural reaction, I do understand the reasoning behind most (if not all) of them, though I'm not entirely sure how I feel about their fairness. Regardless, these are the rules, and they are plainly laid out for everyone to see before  one gets their hopes up. I also agree with WGM Pogonina that some of these comments are impolite and/or in poor taste, but knowing what I do of Sam, he is generally not a rude person, and assuming that these comments were made in a moment of frustration (and having heard many others say much worse things wiht much less provocation), it wasn't difficult for me to give him a pass for these.

Whatever the case it is a shame. A young chess talent like that not wanting to play anymore. He can be one of the greats in the future of this great game and obviously he is frustrated with the norms and rules, but if he let's them beat him, then it is a sad day to see one of chess' future stars start the slow fade away.

thanks for the links pdela and congrats David for the norms. My point still stands, though, since he is a professional player and could just take the more comfortable position of defending the current standards.

Did I watch another movie than the rest of the posters? Cmon, he's pissed at what just happened, none of the things he says holds any weight in this case, when spouting lines such as "stupid rules... and stupid people and... stupid!" (I know that's not the exact quote) one is obviously not thinkin, it's just his emotional response to a bad tournament.

On another topic, that Amanda is smoking, hearing a cute girl talk so enthusiasticly, and about chess at that is really something.

if he quits chess can I have his rating? :)

Having played chess tournaments in my much younger days I fully understand the mental strain involved(especially losing a won game). Sometimes a break away from chess helps the mental equilibrium and puts everything into perspective.I wish Sam Shankland all the best for the future and I think he'll be back.

Lastly I think that too much emphasis is placed on titles.There are thousands of unrated chessplayers world wide who would give any GM a good run for their money.Not everybody is in the position to play tournaments (financial reasons being one of them)

Bryan Smith, the winner of that tournament, was also not exactly happy with the way that event was organized. His comments on the USCF forum are here:

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=194095&sid=e5fca64f7d6ac4b852418b53f613a099#p194095

The tournament definitely seems to have had some organizational issues.  That said, one could say he is acting a bit like a brat who is used to getting his way and now it's gotten a little harder.  Whatever, he's 18, if chess is making him angry he should give it a rest it's not like he couldn't come back in a year or even after going to school.  The real world certainly isn't all flowers and butterflies either.

Smith saying that "it is nearly impossible to play chess in the US" doesn't sit quite right with me. Ok, talented chess players are not treated as well as talented businessmen in the US, but has he any idea of the chess scene in the vast majority of countries in the world? If you were to be born a professional chess player and could select any country in which to be raised, I doubt there are more than five that would be better choices than the US (Russia plus some selected european countries, perhaps).

I believe him in that professional chess might have its flaws in the US but that was way too much of an overstatement in my unsolicited opinion.

http://samshankland.blogspot.com/  Read what he says about it here.

There was no reason for the entry fee to be that high with really no possible chance for GM norms.  It's very easy for us, who play for free as a hobby at a relatively low level of seriousness, to criticize someone like Shankland who's understandably frustrated at consistently turning in GM-level performances with nearly nothing to show for it.  There's a reason why a lot of our young and most talented players aren't becoming professionals. 

Read his blog. I posted it above.

Just might be the case. There's plenty of scientific evidence to support that theory. That's probably why I'm not a gm by now. I've read too many of your posts, and absorbed your ----- energy. 

There are too many GMs anyway - Y Serriwan was right when he said they should only award 5 or so new GMs per year.  The concept of the 'norm' is just more FIDE foolishness.  Hopefully Karpov will be able to set the ship back on course.

let the flaming begin . . .