[news] European Professional Go System established.

[Javaness2]

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.

Indeed, the system's financial element represents a challenge. For instance, compare the European Cup, or some of the preceding schemes, to the bonus tournaments. I would expect an official presentation to reveal more details about the scheme and the plans that have been laid out. This is just 1 document that somebody has taken it upon themselves to publish anonymously without comment.

[RobertJasiek]

Or just use Japanese rules. [...] lets just use the rule set that everyone already knows.

1) Which Japanese style ruleset?

2) Japanese rules are badly known and hard to apply, when it comes to applying them as rules, therefore using Chinese rules is much better.

3) It is nice to see that area scoring is spread more. In particular, since the professionalism is also meant to promote go better in Europe, rules that (in their essence) can be explained and understood in just a few minutes are a very good choice. More particularly, journalists reporting about European professional or pro-selection tournaments will spread the game much more easily, if they can figure out by themselves very quickly what this game is actually about.

[HermanHiddema]

In go, professional is more of a title than in most other sports. Although being a professional implies that you make some money from playing and/or teaching go, making some money from go alone does not make you a professional, it also very much requires a certain minimum playing strength.

Note that the EGF can certify "up to" two players per year. They need not do so, and indeed I think that they should not, but should have some criteria to certify that a player is strong enough to be called a professional. So there may not be 10 professionals in 5 years.

[HermanHiddema]

1) Which Japanese style ruleset?

Whichever a tournament organiser wants.

2) Japanese rules are badly known and hard to apply, when it comes to applying them as rules, therefore using Chinese rules is much better.

Millions of people have been applying the Japanese rules without trouble for centuries, therefore your statement is false.

3) It is nice to see that area scoring is spread more. In particular, since the professionalism is also meant to promote go better in Europe, rules that (in their essence) can be explained and understood in just a few minutes are a very good choice. More particularly, journalists reporting about European professional or pro-selection tournaments will spread the game much more easily, if they can figure out by themselves very quickly what this game is actually about.

The spread of go has never been held back by Japanese rules, nor is there any indication that the adoption of Chinese rules has ever had an impact on spreading go. It is equally easy for journalists to figure out what the game is about for either rule set.

[John Fairbairn]

As others have pointed out, different sports have different ways of talking about themselves. There is a huge difference between a golf professional and a professional golf player. In football, a professional footballer is always a professional football player and no-one uses the phrase football professional. Some sports, like tennis and golf, regulate entry to the professional players' ranks by making players prove to the pro organisations that a minimum standard has been achieved. In other sports you only have to prove yourself to a club.

Go is a special case in many ways, and is (?surprisingly) quite unlike chess, although it could be argued that there are similarities with the old Soviet chess system. One thing that makes chess special is (again as others have mentioned) that pro is really a title. Becoming a pro requires achieving a minimum rank and a diploma. It is the equivalent of a university degree. Once you have your degree it is up to you whether you actually use it to make your living. If you don't, you still retain your diploma.

Further, the status of go players varies a little in each of the main go playing countries. As the country with the oldest organisations Japan sets the standard somewhat. In Japan, although the western term pro is widely used it is not the pukka word. That is kishi. You get some of the flavour by translating that (almost literally) as 'knight of the go board'. You get that status by having a suitable diploma, not by making your living from go. Japan differentiates a little by also having quasi-kishi and local kishi. Both require diplomas but of a lower standard (like, say, accountancy college as opposed to university). Normally these types of pro stay outside the full kishi system (e.g. local kishi have their own championships) and they are never called just kishi.

In Japan, if you earn your living 100% from go (e.g. as a writer) but do not have a kishi diploma, you are never described as a go pro. Instead, you are a professional writer, or whatever.

Korea is near enough the same. China's a bit different. There you first need to earn a 'passport', which is very like getting your 'tour card' in golf. Although getting a passport coincides with becoming 1-dan, the difference is that in the case of a passport (as with a tour card) 'use it or lose it' applies, as the point of it is that it gives you automatic access to all pro tournaments. If you do not take up your places you are expected to drop back to the amateur ranks. However, there is a fuzzy cut-off point in China which means that 'face' becomes a consideration and so those who achieve high pro grades can keep their pro status even if they no longer play in tournaments but instead undertake teaching or coaching. However, even in China a person who earned money from go without having earned a passport would never be called a pro.

So, sorry, Robert - you and I are not pros!

Europe and the USA are free to devise their own models, and now is surely the time to discuss what we want or expect. No-one seems to have asked what the Chinese (in Europe) or the Koreans (in USA) want out of their involvement, so maybe the first step is to ascertain that.

It does not have to be anything sinister. Maybe they just want foreign players who can take part in domestic events - which may not be a huge help for the rest of us. Maybe they hope to see people who can teach go to a high standard, but in that case calling them professional go players would be a bit inconsistent. Indeed, in that case creating a tournament cadre might not be the best use of the money. Giving Robert cash to pursue his research might be a better use

[tchan001]

It should be obvious that normally the sponsors sets the rules to be used as a condition of sponsorship.

[RobertJasiek]

It is the equivalent of a university degree.

University: no tight bottle neck.
Go professional certificates: very tight bottle neck. Additionally only one kind of qualification is measured: playing. So far, teaching is not measured as a qualification criterion.

Robert - you and I are not pros!

Only by the definition of pro rank certificate. E.g., German bureaucracy has a very different view: already the serious intention of starting commercial activities requires registration etc.

No-one seems to have asked what the Chinese (in Europe) or the Koreans (in USA) want out of their involvement, so maybe the first step is to ascertain that.

Yes. As much as the European go public has not been asked what we want. E.g., do we want a bottle neck access? I say: no!

Giving Robert cash to pursue his research might be a better use

While I would agree, EUR 150,000/a could, more generally, be used in various ways. E.g., 100 players / organisers / teachers / researchers each could be supported by (on average) EUR 1,500/a. IMO, such a system or something similar could be much more efficient for raising the standard of European go. Distributing the money among just a handful of players is almost the opposite approach.

[HermanHiddema]

Robert - you and I are not pros!

Only by the definition of pro rank certificate. E.g., German bureaucracy has a very different view: already the serious intention of starting commercial activities requires registration etc.

Words have meaning. Combinations of words have meanings. The combination of words does not necessarily keep the meaning of the individual words involved.

If I buy a lava lamp, I should not expect the lamp to contain actual lava.

Go is a word meaning a certain board game. Professional is a word meaning a person who practices something as their profession.

But Go professional does not then simply mean "a person who practices the board game go as their profession".

The German bureaucracy has no view on the concept "go professional", only on the concept "professional".

[RobertJasiek]

We cannot know if the treaty was meant to be public, but who cares? It contains much important information for everybody. Assuming that the treaty is indeed active, it is also overdue to see it published, because the AGM is very soon.

***

Concerning definitions of "professional", we had the discussion before. It appears to amount to different possible meanings including

- person (player) earning part or all his income from the activity (playing go, teaching go, go books etc.)
- go player possessing a certificate calling him a "professional"
- persons affected by both aspects

There are (European) examples for every of these basic types.

***

One thing is pretty unclear to me: shall the EGF collect future sponsor money, generate income by means of initiating or supervising professional activities or initiate media interest (is Eurosports 3 for mind sports an idea)? Or shall the new professionals take over these tasks?

[paK0]

One thing is pretty unclear to me: shall the EGF collect future sponsor money, generate income by means of initiating or supervising professional activities or initiate media interest (is Eurosports 3 for mind sports an idea)? Or shall the new professionals take over these tasks?

In principle a Grand SIam Tournament should be our "blow off" to the publicity for
getting more attention for our game, under cultural aspects and under sports aspects
as well. Therefore the EGF is in charge to generate a maximum of publicity
(embassies, nel//spapers, television-contacts, internet, cultural institutes,). A top-level
event like this will prove quite effective in helping EGF to draw in sponsorship in
Europe.

CEGO will help EGF on its way to a more business oriented operation mode in Europe

Sounds like that will be EGF duty, but I doubt they would mind the players helping them in that regard =)

[wineandgolover]

So all this is news, right? Not public before the first post? Seems that haewgs might be European Go's version of Wikileaks.

Does this need to be approved by EGF members, or at least a board, or does the EGF President have the authority on his own? If it needs approval, has this happened already, in secret?

It seems weird that this has moved so far, without announcement, scrutiny, or debate.

[wineandgolover]

One of the EGF positions was also "I don't want half of Europe discussing this with a quarter knowledge." Like in politics, where important things are negotiated behind closed doors.

As opposed to a democracy, where people get to vote.

Don't get me wrong, I favor the idea. I just don't understand the secrecy. If it's truly a good idea, why not announce it, brag about it, debate it, and vote on it?

If half of Europe has insufficient knowledge, why not publicize the proposed agreement? Isn't that better than excluding them from the debate?

The political equivalent is a treaty. Certainly those are negotiated behind closed doors. But then the legislature is invited to debate and vote on it. They are also usually privy to the knowledge that a treaty is being negotiated, too.

It sounds like a process that was regretfully kept unnecessarily secret to me. Must make the EGF elite feel important, though.

[HermanHiddema]

Must make the EGF elite feel important, though.

These people spent years building contacts, talking to people, negotiating, much of it in their own time and on their own dime. They manage to negotiate a contract that is a huge win for the EGF. They let the legislative representatives from the member organisations know months in advance and let them vote on the proposal.

And then you have the temerity to put all of that down with a trite "Must make the EGF elite feel important"?

Yeah. F*ck you too.

ADMIN: Please refrain from personal attacks on this forum.

[HermanHiddema]

Yeah. F*ck you too.

Watch your language. What is *your* stake in this?

I see too much hate directed towards hard-working go volunteers too often.

IMO, wineandgolover gravely insulted a group of people he probably does not even know over an issue that he has hardly any information about. The language I used was meant to convey just how grave I consider the insult.

[Javaness2]

The deal was negotiated by the elected EGF officials, with an appropriate mandate. The "secrecy" was due to courtesy and to normal business practice I would guess. Martin will probably explain at the AGM how the feedback he received from the various nations shaped the deal, as well as giving a fuller explanation of it to the public.
I am still surprised at the "no comment" leak, if you are against something why not just say so politely? I sort of wonder if the BGA knows that pdf file is there.