<richardhutnik@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:2b8d7bfb-7f8b-42a7-87ce-073614890aed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> On Mar 23, 5:27 pm, "Chess One" <OneCh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > The top levels should be getting media interest, getting on TV, being
>> > something used to recruit new players and being relevant. This is
why
>> > I speak to the top level.
>>
>> I agree with you!
>
> There was a $1.5 million Chess champion****p in Mexico last year, and
> no one cared. The World Mind S****t Games will be going on, akin to
> the Olympics, and no one in North America is picking it up. If they
> were, then players for Go and checkers could get money to go out
> there, and sponsors. But it isn't happening. And the chess world and
> others are waiting for a Bobby Fischer to bail them out. This is of
> concern for myself, in regards to IAGO and the IAGO World Tour. If
> the big games have issues, how do I end up having modern abstract
> strategy games noticed.
Its a good question, and can be answered, at least by including a few
factors not normal in board games - but let me defer that to say what
doesn't work - or what is to be avoided. I think most chess burocratics
openly [or secretly] whore after Olympiad status and money. Yet the
willful
association with s****ting activities and their frequent drug culture is at
least a double edged prospect - one gets exposure, but of the right kind.
I always thought the best publicity for chess was 'drug free'.
Why chess burocratics /want/ to associate chess with drug testing seems to
me to be completely inane. Anyway - you comments deserve more
consideration
than a few notes.
Can I limit myself here to saying that the presentation of the game means
also accepting the nature of the media, and 'playing along' with that too.
More anon. Phil
|
