30-04-2015, 10:20 PM
I'm glad Andrew Burnett replied before I did to prove not all titled players feel as entitled as Mr Greet comes across, whether he meant it or not, but it does seem from reading his post, the impression is that he, as a titled player, deserves more of my money that I would pay to enter a tournament than the prize winners of the section I actually enter.
This would be, as Mr Burnett says, despite having done nothing for me at all personally.
It may be that having titled players raises the profile of events but until that evolves into sponsorship of events then prize funds that Mr Greet obviously seems to expect isn't going to happen.
I also, personally, very much doubt if a majority of entrants in the supposedly more unimportant sections without titled players, to take the implication, feel that the Open section is entitled to a cut of their entry fees.
I stand to be corrected, of course.
It's not that I don't appreciate the time and effort put into gaining the title but if you then try to use it to justify a higher potential reward for yourself at the expense of your fellow chess players and at the level of a Scottish weekend congress which, to be fair, is normally not something that causes a ripple in the UK pond never mind anywhere else, you do leave yourself open to a perception that you consider yourself to be better than the rest of us and we should just give you the monetised incentive to grace our congress with the presence of the TITLE.
All interesting stuff and a debate that has been rumbling away for many years.
Perhaps now is a chance to bring it into the open and see what the non-titled amongst us think.
We are the vast majority, after all.
This would be, as Mr Burnett says, despite having done nothing for me at all personally.
It may be that having titled players raises the profile of events but until that evolves into sponsorship of events then prize funds that Mr Greet obviously seems to expect isn't going to happen.
I also, personally, very much doubt if a majority of entrants in the supposedly more unimportant sections without titled players, to take the implication, feel that the Open section is entitled to a cut of their entry fees.
I stand to be corrected, of course.
It's not that I don't appreciate the time and effort put into gaining the title but if you then try to use it to justify a higher potential reward for yourself at the expense of your fellow chess players and at the level of a Scottish weekend congress which, to be fair, is normally not something that causes a ripple in the UK pond never mind anywhere else, you do leave yourself open to a perception that you consider yourself to be better than the rest of us and we should just give you the monetised incentive to grace our congress with the presence of the TITLE.
All interesting stuff and a debate that has been rumbling away for many years.
Perhaps now is a chance to bring it into the open and see what the non-titled amongst us think.
We are the vast majority, after all.