Life In 19x19

RobertJasiek wrote:

HermanHiddema wrote:We don't need yet another rule set.

It would have sufficed to use Simplified Ing Rules, as possible according to the EGF General Tournament Rules.

Or just use Japanese rules. No Ing, no Chinese, no FFG, lets just use the rule set that everyone already knows.

tapir wrote:Some questions pop up in my mind:

* What is with European players who already are professionals by the Hankuk Kiwon or Nihon Kiin?

The EGF will certify the "European Professionals" same as Hankuk Kiwon or Nihon Kiin do certify their pros. The idea is that they all are on the same level this means that e.g. Catalin can participate in all events where the "new" european pros participate.

tapir wrote:* EGF has no jurisdiction over the vast majority of tournaments: how will they induce tournament organizers to apply for bonus point tournaments?

The bigger tournaments should apply to hold a bonus tournament. Nobody can be forced to do so i guess.

tapir wrote:* What is the new amateur diploma scheme? I expect a lot of resentment when this is supposed to mean we have to pay for ranks and/or EGF is setting the rules for every country.

On this matter nothing is decided yet. I suppose it will be all decided by each country's organization separately. EGF will provide some standards and probably also help with the paperwork (printing of the diplomas).

wineandgolover wrote:This is very exciting.

I am interested by Javaness' comment as well. Can I assume this is a premature leak then?

Is the US pro system similarly sponsored?

This is only a EGF / CEGo (Beijing Zong Yi Yuan Cheng Culture Communication Co. Ltd.) cooperation. They sponsor only the EGF.

Looks like an official leak, the document is authentic It's only 1 month until the AGM in Poland, probably not a bad idea to start a public discussion about it.

It seems rather strange that somebody from the BGA chose to leak it here, rather than on a BGA mailing list.

HermanHiddema wrote:

walpurgis wrote:This is very interesting news indeed, especially after the (apparently?) failed attempt at professional European league some time ago. Could this be the beginning of closing the gap between east and west now that both US and EU have a pro system...

The earlier attempt was really just some enthusiastic players saying they wanted a pro system. They had no sponsors, and you cannot set up a pro system without money. This proposal has big sponsors (to the tune of $150,000 per year) and has the opportunity to allow talented players to study in China, so it looks a lot more viable. Also, the sponsorship lasts until 2021, so they have quite some time to try to work towards self-sufficiency.

Will that money suffice?
In the beginning it will probably be enough, but after 5 years you gotta pay a salary for 10 pros, 15000$ of yearly income sounds rather grim to me.


I think it will be really hard to get a self-sustaining pro system going over here in Europe. I'm not sure about how much players/fans we got, but the fact that go is not a viewing sport will probably be the biggest hurdle.

paK0 wrote:salary

Professional go players get a salary?

Doesn't "professional" mean that you make your living with that activity?

It doesn't have to be monthly, match appearance fees or w/e might work as well, but you can't really call them professionals if they need to have non-go related activities to support themselves.


Maybe I'm wrong an the "pro" is just a title in that case?

It's just a title. Obviously, it's connected to money-making, but just as in the US, there probably is no expectation that players will be able to survive based on a professional stipend or game fees (this isn't true in Japan, China and Korea either--only some pros make a living without teaching or other side businesses).

I wish I'd had the foresight to write a FAQ about professionals many years ago when I first thought of the idea. It would have saved me a lot of time.

paK0 wrote:you can't really call them professionals if they need to have non-go related activities to support themselves.

This is exactly why so many go professionals teach.

paK0 wrote:Doesn't "professional" mean that you make your living with that activity?

No. If I say someone is a professional soccer player all that means is that they get paid to play. It says nothing about whether they could live off that money. It just distinguishes the unpaid amateur from the presumably more skilled paid players. Or sometimes different sports, e.g. amateur and professional boxing.

On the other hand in English usually a profession refers to what someone does to make a living. So someone might be a professional soccer player but playing soccer may not be their profession unless they actually earn enough to make a living off of it.

This is really just a matter of definition, but to me, if you say 'he is professional something' this implies that he does the 'something' for a living. In other words, he does not just do it and happens to get paid some, but actually supports himself from it, or mostly from it. Might not be exclusive support, and he might be making some extra monies on the side with other stuff, but this is his profession. This is what pays the rent and this is what puts the food on the table.

A professional plumber who earns his living doing all kinds of plumbing magic is still just a plumber, no matter if he also gets paid here and there for playing a game of Go.

But its just my understanding, and we can certainly define 'professional this or that' any way we want.

paK0 wrote:Will that money suffice?
In the beginning it will probably be enough, but after 5 years you gotta pay a salary for 10 pros, 15000$ of yearly income sounds rather grim to me.

The idea is clearly that the EGF starts raising a substantial amount of money itself as soon as the program starts. It involves a lot more than the AGA - Hankuk Kiwon cooperation even if the "starting a professional system" sounds similar.

Bantari wrote:This is really just a matter of definition, but to me, if you say 'he is professional something' this implies that he does the 'something' for a living. In other words, he does not just do it and happens to get paid some, but actually supports himself from it, or mostly from it. Might not be exclusive support, and he might be making some extra monies on the side with other stuff, but this is his profession. This is what pays the rent and this is what puts the food on the table.

A professional plumber who earns his living doing all kinds of plumbing magic is still just a plumber, no matter if he also gets paid here and there for playing a game of Go.

But its just my understanding, and we can certainly define 'professional this or that' any way we want.

Usually there's a distinction between when we apply it to something that is normally a job, say plumbing, and normally a hobby or pastime, say go, chess or soccer.

Mh, Wikipedia says, that when it comes to sports, you have to earn some money to be called professional, but indeed there was no mention that is has to be your main source of income.

Wow, the go world is mighty confusing XD.

paK0 wrote:Mh, Wikipedia says, that when it comes to sports, you have to earn some money to be called professional, but indeed there was no mention that is has to be your main source of income.

Wow, the go world is mighty confusing XD.

Sometimes you see the word "semi-professional" used to refer to people who make their living doing something else but it's problematic because it can have very specific meanings in some activities like rugby where you have strict divisions where some are fully professional and some are semi-professional but you still get a fair number of professional athletes whereas you have activities like go, tennis and many, many others where living solely off your tournament play or performance is impossible for all but a very small number at the very top and people in the pro scene supplementing their income in some way is the norm. Calling almost all professional tennis players semi professional would almost never be done in the tennis community. It'd be viewed as a disservice to them. Whereas few would take offence to calling certain players semi-pros in rugby.