20-12-2011, 02:40 PM
Whilst I agree with almost everything said above the other side of the arguement must be put.
What is a major encouragement to so many really good young footballers to continue. It is the rewards offered to the top players. What rewards are on offer to the top chess players in Britain? Unfortuneately very few.
If we want to encourage youngsters to continue playing chess you must have some sort of reward system in place. The current financial structure discourages many of our top juniors from putting in the effort to continue to progress.
It could be argued that all available money should be pumped into adult chess in an attempt to create a structure that would allow players to progress even at adult level. After all parents will pay for their children regardless of any subsidy. Indeed if proper professional coaching was being paid for on a regular basis we would be able to support professional chess players in this country AND have better juniors. This would certainly be viewed by everyone as a win, win situation.
Before anyone panics, I am playing Devil's Advocate but there is a certain amount of truth in my theory and probably as much as in the arguement for everything going to juniors.
With limited funds getting the balance right is nearly impossible.
We need top class events to promote chess and get the media interested. With media interest you have more chance of attracting people (and sponsors).
What is needed is everyone pulling to gether to get a bit of momentum going. There should not be a debate over funding adult v junior chess to the detriment of both.
What is a major encouragement to so many really good young footballers to continue. It is the rewards offered to the top players. What rewards are on offer to the top chess players in Britain? Unfortuneately very few.
If we want to encourage youngsters to continue playing chess you must have some sort of reward system in place. The current financial structure discourages many of our top juniors from putting in the effort to continue to progress.
It could be argued that all available money should be pumped into adult chess in an attempt to create a structure that would allow players to progress even at adult level. After all parents will pay for their children regardless of any subsidy. Indeed if proper professional coaching was being paid for on a regular basis we would be able to support professional chess players in this country AND have better juniors. This would certainly be viewed by everyone as a win, win situation.
Before anyone panics, I am playing Devil's Advocate but there is a certain amount of truth in my theory and probably as much as in the arguement for everything going to juniors.
With limited funds getting the balance right is nearly impossible.
We need top class events to promote chess and get the media interested. With media interest you have more chance of attracting people (and sponsors).
What is needed is everyone pulling to gether to get a bit of momentum going. There should not be a debate over funding adult v junior chess to the detriment of both.