For it's not so much the database aspect, but the risk-reward curve is awful. You're probably better off pushing your child to become a professional athlete, in

For it's not so much the database aspect, but the risk-reward curve is awful. You're probably better off pushing your child to become a professional athlete, in those terms (not that I'm encouraging that). The time commitment to becoming a world class player is such that consumes most of a young person's life. I was a Master level player by the age of 17, through some talent, supplemented by hours upon hours of studying and coaching. This was not pushed upon me by parents, but more out of my own competitiveness. This is not a prodigious level - you should probably be an International Master by that age to be called a prodigy. I was only a top 10 or so player nationally for my age category, with a 0% probability of making a living or anything close to it from the game. By the time I reached University, I all but completely abandoned chess. Studying Computer Engineering meant I couldn't devote enough time to it to stay competitive, and real life happened. Same as you, I will teach my kids chess, and help them get to a certain competitive level, because I do believe that playing chess at a high level improved my brain function in a way that has helped me in other analytical tasks (e.g. engineering), but I won't push them to continue with it beyond a certain point.