Selling Chess like Beer
![[Print This Post]](http://www.rantlust.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.gif "[Print This Post]")
A few of the ranters here know that I enjoy a good game of a chess (frequently with a good scotch or vodka-tonic) but it turns out that I do not follow international chess competitions like I follow tennis or soccer. All that might change soon - only if chess overcomes the threat from poker and other forms of online gambling.
Most of you know that online poker is now a multi-billion dollar business and continues to grow. A testimony to the growth of online poker is what Vikrant Bhargava, the general manager of PartyPoker.com — which bills itself as the “World’s Largest Poker Room” had to say on CNN “You’re not going to believe this, but I’ve never played poker in a land-based poker room”. As it grows it threatens adjacent sports/games like Chess and competes for the same sponsorship dollars and players.
International Chess is fighting back. In a move, labeled by its critics as “Soft Pawn”, international chess personalities are trying to promote the ’sexy’ attributes of its women players. Nigel Short, ex British chess champ, has launched “chess chicks” i.e. a World Chess Beauty Contest. Many critics find it demeaning and disrespectful to get fans to look at photos and video clips of women chess champs and not study their moves (no pun intended) - but there are some who disagree.
Among those who disagree is Vaness Reid, ranked at 47,694th in the global rankings for chess, and now ranked #1 on the “Chess Chicks” contest being held by Mr Short. Ms Reid says the contest was “important because it shows people chess is not just a game for intellectuals, the aged or nerdy people”. “It’s also for youthful people,”. Others who agree - include the woman grandmaster and the very beautiful Alexandra Kosteniuk - who sells glossy pictures in different poses on CD and DVDs here
Some of the Critics of ’soft pawn’ like Jennifer Shahade, twice a US women’s champion are more nuanced in their criticism when they say : “There is nothing wrong with making chess sexier by highlighting the hip players who participate. But I find the World Chess Beauty Contest misguided and juvenile.”
I am on Mr. Shahade’s side of this issue - clearly the promotion of the sexy side of chess is poorly thought through and could hurt, not help, the game. Prominent members of the Chess community are trying to capitalize on their very amateurish attempts to promote their sport. If one is looking to grow the appeal of a deeply analytical game and attract sponsors, marketing it like a wet T-shirt contest has little chances of success.
I originally read the “Soft Pawn” story here
Ah - chess. This was a game that I was briefly obsessed by. But I gave it up after it became apparent to me that I suck and no amount of reading and practice was going to make me any better. But I did leave my obsession with a new found appreciation for the game. Had I known about soft pawn, I may have stayed a while longer
Anyway, talking about the stats that matter, I took a brief look at the top 50 women and what strikes me is how far and away better than the others Judith Polgar (#1 woman and #8 men and women combined) is from the rest. Second by the way is her sister Zsuzsa who is an American? Their ELO score difference would translate to a 71% chance of Polga beating Zsuzsa. Contrasting that with Kasparov (arguably the best who ever played) with Anand, the former has only a slightly more than even 53% chance of beating the latter.
What has happened to all the attention and coverage that the men’s chess championships used to bring? I don’t know if Kasparov is still the world champion but didn’t he have a dispute and set up a rival players’ championship title? Anyway, the last time I followed anything chess was when Kasparov lost to that IBM chess program (Blue Gene?)
Deep Blue
I am one of the people who enjoy a game of chess (and scotch) with the author. But, I never thought of it as a “Sport.” The OED defines sport as an “activity involving physical exertion and skill.” Chess, is far from that definition. It’s a serious board game as far as I am concerned.
Returning to the theme of the post, I don’t see what the brouhaha is about promoting the “game” by any means. (Women’s) Tennis isn’t popular just because of the way a Navratilova or Davenport plays but also because of the way an Evert, a Sabatini or Sharapova looks. Even in male dominated sports like soccer, David Beckham’s “looks” are capitalized on more than his game.
“Mr?” A Freudian slip there, riyer?
Further research reveals a book written by Ms Shahade called “Chess Bitch: Women In The Ultimate Intellectual Sport”
Our roving reporter um… reports that PartyPoker.com is responding to the ’soft pawn’ threat by renaming their business PartyPokeHer.com. Fetishists of double entendres are watching the developing catfight (har, har) with bated breath.
Last week’s issue of New Yorker has a fascinating article on chess programs and intelligence. The article, written by Tom Mueller, is primarily about an Austrian computer programmer Chrilly Dollinger and his creation Hydra. This is considered by many to be the most advanced chess playing program in the world. Unfortunately, I don’t think this article is online but a good recap can be found here:
http://snipurl.com/ky7j