"I think it comes down to how much you enjoy chess. How you feel during tournaments, the ups and downs, ebbs and flows of it all. If you can imagine yourself happy in such a profession, I say go for it."

e [economics, Brandeis]

Chess: Player, Writer, Analyst

Chess: Commentator/Analyst

e [philosophy, Harvard] [Chartered Financial Analyst]

Hedge Fund Manager (retired)

"Everyone must answer this for him/herself. If you have the opportunity to go to a good college, it is almost always worth it in my opinion. You can always pursue chess activities while in school. If you decide to play chess professionally, remember that you are not just making a decision for the moment, but also that will affect your opportunities throughout your career. To be successful as a chess professional, you will either need to be one of the top players in the world (very hard!), or you will need to be comfortable being entrepreneurial and self-sufficient. There are advantages to working at a company or a university or similar institution, and there are also advantages to learning a marketable, non-chess skill. That said, if you are passionate about chess, if you have the skills, and if it suits your temperament, then being a chess professional can be fun and rewarding.
My bottom line: At the age of 18, you almost certainly do not know what you will want to be doing for the next several decades, so it makes sense to keep your options open and maximize your flexibility. You should probably go to school and also pursue chess rather than just commit yourself 100% to chess."

"The number of people in this group for whom the best plan is to never go to college is probably small. And it is possible to combine university and chess. But more generally, I would recommend, if you have the chance, taking some time to consider major decisions. You don't have to immediately advance from one programmed life stage to the next. When I completed my undergraduate degree, I was considering grad school, but instead chose not to take on any formal commitments. Over the course of the next year I settled on the path of software engineering, while honing my programming skills. So if you have a strong interest in trying full-time chess after high school I would encourage that; if it does not work out, you can go to college after one year."

g [JD, University of Michigan]

"tax lawyer at a law firm (McDermott Will & Emery)."

"Definitely go to college if you and your family can afford it. You can make good progress in your chess career while enrolled in college and in all events it is difficult to plan on having a lucrative chess career in the US even if you have the desire and ability make it to a super-grandmaster level. So it is good to keep all career options open – and education is also an end in itself! If you are very serious about chess another possibility is to take a year off between high school and college to study and play chess (which I did). I still think it is best to attend college right away, but the one-year delay may be an attractive alternative during COVID times. "

e [BA, Statistics, Berkeley], [BA, Political Economy, Berkeley], [Graduate Certificate, Data Mining, Stanford]

"I'll preface my answer by saying that I'm assuming that the person debating this enjoys playing chess and could seriously see themselves doing something professionally in the chess world (be it playing, coaching, writing, etc). I say that because I've seen talented and strong chess players who played through high school only to drop it soon afterwards because they didn't really find joy in the game anymore - that joy was probably there at some point, but either through external expectations, the crucible that can be competitive chess, or whatever else, they really just wanted to stop playing as soon as they could get out on their own.
So with that in mind, generally speaking, I'd try to answer the two following questions to make a recommendation:
- does the person have other potentially professional interests besides chess?
- how likely is this person to be a top-50 player in the world?
The reason for the second question is that I think if you have a likely path to being a top-50 player, then you really have a chance to play tournament chess professionally - below that (we can argue if it's top-50, top-35, 2700+ for men, etc) and you'll likely be coaching, writing, etc for a main source of steady income, and that can be done as a top-100 player or a top-500 player as well.
And the reason for the first question is if there are other fields that really interest you (be they history, literature, math, etc), that's the perfect time to go and explore those areas at college. Obviously you can apply to college a few years later too if you find out that you're not making as much improvement as you wanted or you're not enjoying the professional tournament grind much, but if more than a couple years go by, that return to schooling and college experience I think will be tougher and less positive.
So basically if the answer to the second question is "pretty likely", I'd then try to figure out if there's something else in #1 that they're as passionate about, or else I might recommend the chess route. And in other cases, I'd probably recommend the college route first at least.
In my own case, I was a reasonably strong player in HS (at the times, youngest NM in US history and maybe the youngest IM in US history too -- at least I'm seeing that online now!) and I had finished top-5 in multiple World Youths and won a Pan-Am youth title. But for me, I always had other interests besides chess and I also realized from about 14-18, I didn't improve as much as my peers in those age groups, so I didn't really consider playing full time out of high school.
And not that openings are everything, but this reminds me of something Kaidanov used to tell my parents and I -- I worked with him for about 4 years (from 1997-2000) and he used to say that if I really focused on chess, he'd teach me some real openings like the Sicilian! Haha, as it was, I picked up a huge chunk of my later repertoire from him (the French, Semi-Slav, Rossolimo, etc) but a lot of it was focused on secondary lines.
After college and then working for almost 2 years, I realized that the field I had gone into (economic/litigation consulting) was pretty boring and so I decided to quit and play chess professionally, with the help of the Samford Fellowship that I won. During those 6 years, I was playing about an average of 2 tournaments a year, so I wasn't studying regularly but I also wasn't completely out of touch; after starting professional chess back up in 2008, I gained the GM title in about 3 months (I had graduated high school a norm short) and kept playing for about 2.5 more years.
Late in 2010, I was thinking about coming back to the US (I was living in Barcelona at the time) and finding a "normal" job and I decided to do that because (1) the professional tournament grind was wearing on me; and (2) I still had the statistics interest that I wanted to explore. I was talking to the Canadian GM Kevin Spraggett after a tournament in France in 2010 and he was asking me if it was likely that I'd be as good in whatever professional field I went into as compared to chess (at the time, I was generally around #220-250 in the world). I wasn't sure at the time at all, but I wanted to see if the stats side which always interested me (I never liked pure math actually) would be fun without some of the downs that chess could have (lots of travel, solo competition, clear losses haha). So I ended up getting a job as a Marketing Data Analyst, took some coursework on the side to move into the new Data Science field, and have stayed in Data Science (and Data Engineering) ever since. There are no ratings in Data Science, but as it's happened, I think there's a solid case for me to be at that level or better in this field!
Anyway, in my case, going to college didn't stop me from getting better at chess afterwards (but it certainly put a kibosh on any dreams to be World Champion!), and actually I think the college + work experience before coming back to chess helped me at the chessboard too - I better understood myself, my motivations, how I could learn/develop, etc. And the professional chess time also has benefited me in my return to an industry role in Data Science."

e [business & finance, Indiana]

e [polisci & philosophy, UConn]

"This is a tough question, it is a deeply personal decision, and the answer does not have to be same for everyone. I do, however, think that for most people, outside the truly elite players, it’s a mistake to forgo college for professional chess."

e [math & comp sci, MIT]

Chess: Grandmaster-in-Residence

"I would certainly advise high rated young players to go to college. There are many options in life but college should provide more of them. It is wonderful to pursue chess though and see the international world of it. One meets interesting people from every country of the world. If you can succeed like Caruana it's fabulous, but most players will also need a different career besides chess."

"My advice would be to pursue the direction in life that is going to make you the happiest in the long term and focus on the long term. I imagine I'm more unique not having even graduated high school, maybe not, but I imagine so. For me I was homeschooled my whole life because of chess and the traveling I was doing. My plan was always to go take the GED before going to college and then go to college, but I hit a point where I knew I could make a living coaching chess and I love doing it. So right now focusing on coaching rather than schooling is where I find the most happiness, but I also have some ideas of what I can do with it long term. I think going to college can be great, but I also think we live in a world of great possibilities without college. Don't duck out just to be lazy or because it isn't the most fun, whatever you do it will take hard work and not always be the most fun. But also, don't sell yourself short on what you can accomplish."

Research Associate at Harvard

"Obviously, college is a major investment with pros and cons (these can be found anywhere). Things will be very different on a person-by-person basis, and it's key to consider what you would get out of college (for example, college life and work is generally not the most helpful, or necessary, for serious chess aspirations). Still, to give my personal two cents: I have no regrets and would strongly encourage everyone to at least consider the option. A few specific thoughts in favor:
- College can be a place for you to explore and figure out what you want to do if you're not sure yet,
- College chess programs can help alleviate some of the cons and provide a balance between chess and school, and
- A gap year is always an option if you want to give chess life a try or achieve certain goals before attending (or choosing not to)"

co-owner Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Atlanta

f [Master's comp sci, UW]

Distinguished Engineer at Google

e [Spanish & Italian, NYU]

e [Russian & German, UMBC]

"As for advice, I have some big regrets relating to college. First of all, at the end of high school I was not at all motivated to apply for colleges and did not believe I would be able to afford to go. Therefore I only applied to UMBC and one other college (at the last minute). It would have been better to apply to some top-level colleges and see if there were some financial possibilities that would allow me to go. Second, I ended up getting a degree which proved to be pretty useless, at least professionally. I was very focused on chess when I was at the university and did not give much thought to the future. Therefore studied subjects which were interesting to me, regardless of whether they would lead to a job. Looking back, I wish I had undertaken a more serious subject of study, like mathematics or science. Basically I wish I had made more of the opportunities I had then. My advice would be, first of all, to apply to many colleges, regardless of whether you think you can afford to pay for them, and go to the best one you can. Second, professional chess is not easy, so study a subject which is not worthless. Finally, they should carefully check independently whatever their academic advisors tell them. My graduation was delayed by two years and I lost a full scholarship for graduate school because I had been incorrectly told by my advisor and another administrative department at UMBC that I had everything I needed to graduate, when in fact I was missing one basic general requirement class."

h [Philosophy, Heidelberg]

c [University of South Florida]

"Ten to 15 or 20 years ago I would not seriously have recommended at young players to consider chess as a profession. However, times change and we are seeing chess making serious inroads into the scholastic pre-college education levels as a wonderful educational tool. Education in this country struggles big time - with all of the reality tv shows, video games - instant gratification as social media stars become famous for little or no discernible talent, - it all adds up to a greater than ever need for a tool like chess that forces students to think for themselves, accept responsibility for their decisions, etc. So - years ago the life of a professional player was pretty limited - a lot of travel, low prizes, declining skills past 35 with newer generations nipping at your heels and no insurance or retirement plans. If today's generation while becoming good at chess, also develop literary and social skills, then the fallback is probably getting a job as a chess teacher in a private or public school. I know Topalov once made some sarcastic comment about "What will I do when I retire? Go teach chess to children." However, one, teaching chess to kids has its own rewards - when you see they "Get it" and their face lights up. When you see them start to grow and gain confidence in themselves because they have finally found something they understand and are good at. I recently (in the last 6 months or so) saw an ad in England where they were looking for qualified chess teachers for the school system. So bottom line, it is up to each student to decide and may be a function of family background, resources, their available options, but in general if they also develop literary and communication skills the fall back is a job as a Chess Teacher in a school system - not such a bad downside at all."

e [City College of New York]

newspaper reporter, editor (retired)

"If you have realistic hopes of becoming world champion, college may not be for you. If you are 16 and rated well over 2500 (FIDE), you have to figure out whether or not (a) you are going to devote your career to chess and (b) whether you have time for a real education. When I was in college I had four priorities. In order they were (a) maintaining a good average (if not I could lose my draft deferment and be inducted into the Army), (b) working on the college newspaper, The Campus, (c) squeezing in at least one midnight-to-8am shift as a copy boy at the New York Post and (d) playing chess. Because of (a) I managed to graduate without being drafted and sent to Vietnam, (b) I learned most of what I know about journalism and (c) I made the contacts that led me to getting a tryout as a reporter. Only about five percent of my free time was devoted to chess. Yet during my college years I gained about 250 rating points, played my first international chess and won the Marshall Chess Club championship for the the first two times. I didn't appreciate what I learned in college until many years had passed. Now I can see how important, for example, learning how to read Russian helped. Perhaps the biggest lesson was realizing how I could fit all of my priorities into a 24-hour day. It's hard for me to imagine how a typical Friday for me, when I was 20, consisted of taking a full day of classes, spending another eight hours at the college newspaper office, then going to Marshall Chess Club (to find a comfortable armchair in the back room to sleep in) and then leaving for a midnight shift at the Post. When I got home the next morning I would catch some sleep, try to remember who I was paired with in the next round of the club championship and do my only chess studying of the week."

f [Master's in Library Science, UCLA]

"When I was a teenage chess master, I remember well the advice I received from two prominent grandmasters. Both discouraged me from pursuing a career as a professional chessplayer. Pal Benko pointed out that the grandmaster title is not really the equivalent of a tenured university position, or other good secure job. That an aging grandmaster had to prove himself each time at the board. This was at a time when Pal, having been twice in the Candidates, was traveling the United States playing in (and generally winning) weekend Swiss tournaments, the first of a number of great
players to follow that difficult path.
Larry Evans made the same case in a different way. He told me that there was absolutely no harder way to make money than by playing chess: that whatever else I might decide to do, I would make more money, more easily.
My academically oriented family was also not enamored with the possibility of my pursuing chess seriously, certainly not if it was to interfere with my studies. Nonetheless, that is what I did: dropped out of college and played chess. It was not until around the age of thirty that I limped my way back through school, and not until 1986 at the age of 34 that I had the necessary degrees and landed my first job as a librarian. Was it a mistake to drop out of school and play chess? Was it a mistake to later stop playing chess and pursue something entirely different? I don’t believe it is simple to determine such things. Chess is difficult, but at least has fixed rules. Life is more complicated. I do know that in both cases, dropping out of school to play chess, and then later returning to school to pursue something entirely different, I was following my heart and my inner motivations. And I
also know that I don’t regret either decision.
I loved working as a librarian; it worked for me not merely financially but also personally. And of course I love chess, and cannot really regret the chess years in my teens and twenties."

Kaufman, Lawrence

Chess: Author

"It is difficult to give advice during this pandemic, as no one knows how it will change the world. I would advise most chess players to get a college degree, especially since no one knows whether OTB chess will return to its former status. If you are already strong enough to make good money as a chess pro then the choice is less clear. In my own case the combination of what I learned in college plus what I learned from the chess world made for a very successful career, but chess was not a practical career in the 1960s except for the very best players."