+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Appearance fees for our best players (/thread-155.html)
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Mike Scott - 23-12-2011
Quote:I'd say they are both tied together though. More players playing Chess from a young age = more GMs in the future. We need to play the numbers game.
The devil is in the detail. The hard work that has been put in at primary level in the last 10 years has probably resulted in more primary school kids playing the game competitively but without a structure/system to take them on after primary most disappear.
Can you explain why you think sending more players, irrespective of their strength, to the WORLDS/EUROS will result in more players and stronger players playing?
Its not always a numbers game - for example James Gillespies Primary out performed both South Morningside and Sciennes for a number of years and is generally of a similar strength in team competitions even though it is a significantly smaller club (~20 members against 80 or more at the others). If you can do with the 80 what can be done with the 20 then you probably right but often it is not.
Andy Muir - you're generation also won the UK schools twice (Ayr Acad.)
And Paul was in fact world champion at U16 OR 17.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Andrew McHarg - 23-12-2011
Mike Scott Wrote:Quote:I'd say they are both tied together though. More players playing Chess from a young age = more GMs in the future. We need to play the numbers game.
The devil is in the detail. The hard work that has been put in at primary level in the last 10 years has probably resulted in more primary school kids playing the game competitively but without a structure/system to take them on after primary most disappear.
Can you explain why you think sending more players, irrespective of their strength, to the WORLDS/EUROS will result in more players and stronger players playing?
Because I think there needs to be something to work towards. There needs to be a reason that you want to improve as a player and become the best of your age category. After achieving this status it's unfair to have the opportunity pulled from under your feet - just because you don't happen to be a very strong player.
I know that I would personally be gutted if I had the chance to play for my country but some technicality (like grade) prevented me from doing so.Mike Scott Wrote:Its not always a numbers game - for example James Gillespies Primary out performed both South Morningside and Sciennes for a number of years and is generally of a similar strength in team competitions even though it is a significantly smaller club (~20 members against 80 or more at the others). If you can do with the 80 what can be done with the 20 then you probably right but often it is not.
Agreed that it's not always a numbers game - but on average it is. It's not the whole story, clearly, but more players will broaden the likelihood of unveiling a very special talent. I can't comment on the example you gave, but I don't think we are in disagreement here. I'd like to see as many players as possible playing and a progressive structure in place to bring them on and keep them interested.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - David Deary - 23-12-2011
amuir Wrote:I still think that our 60 year olds are comparative winners over our 15 year olds
Our 60 year olds won the Glorney in 1965 and have had a top 10 finish in the European Seniors.
No Glorney wins in 46 years despite £8000 pa on junior chess
When was the last time a junior got a top 10 finish in a european/world junior event ? I believe that Mark Condie, Tim Upton, Paul Motwani and other 40 year old + players have done this
Give me some money for senior chess please
As Alex stated you aren't comparing like for like over the decades since then. Also as Hugh said is this your argument for lowering the funding of junior chess? To me it suggests it needs more support not less. =o
Btw, for the record I think our Seniors do an excellent job and are an asset to our nation. We should endeavour to increase support for Seniors more but not by pulling support from Junior chess. That is just counter productive in my view.
Andy Howie Wrote:Interesting Litmus test in the summer. Alex will no doubt be offering conditions for the Scottish. Will be interesting to see how many titled players take it up.
My thoughts exactly. As there is more funding for the Scottish I hope we see the target of 10 titled players in the Scottish Championships. I would be very disappointed if we didn't achieve it given the work Alex has put in and the very generous donation from our anonymous benefactor.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Hugh Brechin - 23-12-2011
Quote:Because I think there needs to be something to work towards. There needs to be a reason that you want to improve as a player and become the best of your age category. After achieving this status it's unfair to have the opportunity pulled from under your feet - just because you don't happen to be a very strong player.
I think this is the core of the issue: I think absolute strength is more important than relative strength within an age-group when deciding who gets to go where. Isn't 'reach such-and-such a playing level' a more meaningful target for players to aim at than 'be higher rated than such-and-such-a-player'? Some age-groups are stronger than others, which means that where players are in terms of grading tells us more than where they are in terms of how highly they rank in their age category. When I was a junior, I was fairly consistently the strongest player in my age-group (those born in 1988), but there were a few players both one year younger and one year older who were stronger. If, for instance, Colin Hall and Steven Tweedie hadn't played the game, then I might have been the strongest player in age categories quite often, but that wouldn't have made me any more deserving of international selection. Had I been 300 points higher-rated, that would have been a different story.
Fundamentally, I think that whether players are selected for events like the European and World Youth should be a function of their strength, not of the strength of their peer-group. They should absolutely be targets to aim for - tangible targets where it's clear that what you have to do to achieve selection is to play at a certain level, irrespective of the results of other players.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Mike Scott - 23-12-2011
Andrew Mc
Quote:Because I think there needs to be something to work towards
Exactly. Why do you persist to give the impression that you think that someone has said that its the worlds or nothing?
What we have been suggesting is that players build up towards competing in the very top events.
Why do you think players would not be motivated by being selected for other events? These would still be challenging but in which they have a better chance to score above 50%.
A great example of which is the Liverpool team event which involves 30 + players.
Quote:it's unfair to have the opportunity pulled from under your feet
No one is 'pulling the rug..': That clearly implies some sudden imposition of new rules but I have specifically said that any changes to the system would need to be introduced gradually, by for example setting the grading bar low enough so that everyone who would have qualified before would still qualify in the initial year (or years) so that when the rules start to kick in everyone is fully aware and had the chance to adjust to the new rules.
Quote:- just because you don't happen to be a very strong player.
Perhaps you believe that is unfair that Jonny won Grangemouth because 'he just happened to be a strong player' ? I am afraid that is chess. These top events are about the strongest players competing to find out who is best.
Quote:but on average it is
The example I give is spread over almost 10 years, so averages do not always work out. This is especially true in chess where in practice the numbers of players is and always will be relatively small. One of the points is that the pattern you often find, be it in chess or in physic classes in school you will get good years followed by weaker years. You would think that on average each year would be the same but it rarely is. This is the sort of detail one needs to understand when making a policy.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - robin moore - 23-12-2011
Thanks again for to all for fantastic input on quite clearly is a very important topic.
Some thoughts..
"Filler players"- The players that compete at World and European level for their country may not be the best they have but are still strong players. You can bet your bottom dollar they have been being coached by a titled player for up to a year pre-event.
Andy Muir- Your argument for more money for senior players at the expense of juniors is clearly lost.
Andy M- If you could form a structure for online training through this website, in my opinion it would be the most progressive move in Scottish chess for years.
As a nation- We are not going to just sit near the bottom of the pile. We have too many good people and great ideas to accept that.
The events calender- I wish this could be sorted out sooner. The amount of planning that goes in to an organised national overseas event is unbelievable.
The grading threshold- A very tough one! I can see and appreciate all arguments. I would rather not be drawn on this now as there is a rather comfy fence not far away.
Funding for online chess- The parents of the students pay the coach directly for online coaching training without cost to CS. ChessScotland pick up the tab as always for PVG clearance.
Hope this is helpful,
Robin.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - David G Congalton - 23-12-2011
Are there any tournament rules which would prevent our Olympiad, Euro Seniors team etc from wearing a sponsors logo on their clothing or prominently displaying a sponsors logo during an event?
If there are I would assume they would only apply in the actual playing area and while playing. If not do any other nations sport such sponsorship logos at these events?
I know the international junior calendar is quite a full one for our nation with Worlds, Euros, Glorney, Liverpool etc but some of these are individual events, all be it we send a squad.
Sticking specifically to international team events at all levels, junior through to senior, what events do Scotland normally enter a team for and are they annual or biannual, as I believe the Olympiad is?
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Angus McDonald - 24-12-2011
Said I would respond tonight.
Been a long day though so just briefly.
I appreciate both Calum and Clements posts qualifying their comments and I'm happy to accept what they have now said about The World Youth. I'd rather we speak in general terms because mentioning specific events does eventually relate to specific players. Final comment on this. I was massively impressed by all those who played at The World Youth. Masses of work ethic and talent imho.
If the point is that Scotland in general isn't doing as well as we might then I accept that. I do believe in the current juniors to do better and I also think with online coaching in place progress will be made more quickly than it might have been.
Out of the 3 coaches mentioned Andrew and Clement have followed the path of progress which I think the system currently supports and the one I'd probably like Ian to follow. Their effort and investment in chess is much to be admired. Calum is the one though that puzzles me. I don't know how he's motivated himself with very few big opportunities along the way. I think what he has achieved is magnificient with little recognition along the way. I know about the British under 15 and under 16 championships but little was made of that really also. All three deserve to become titled players and I'm certain they will.
Following a path more similar to Calum are other very talented older juniors in Aberdeen. Adam Bremner and Daniel Maxwell. Neither have had many opportunties but both have the potential to become titled players. They also have kept themselves motivated in Chess when at times it must have been difficult to do so.
Finally I'd like to apologise to Hugh for irritating him :-)
I know you all collectively think that I know very little but I will tell you one thing with conviction.
There is more in it ultimately for all of you and indeed all involved in Chess if you spread the net far and wide!! Andrew McHarg is right basically because he agrees with me :U
Paul and Robin also get it I think. I'd be surprised if when Robin eventually scrapes himself of his fence .Ouch! That he will come down on the side of putting barriers in the way of the best at agegroups representing their country. Rejecting the chance of the free accommodation place. We need as many ways to inspire people into Chess as possible.
Signing off. I think the future of junior Chess is in good hands.
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Craig Pritchett - 24-12-2011
Wow! Some thread!!
Robin Moore inadvertently (I think) suggests that there should be "no more" money for Seniors chess. There isn't and never has been any financial support at all, not even for any event entry fees.
No senior to my knowledge has asked for an "appearance fee" - an unfortunate choice of phrase to say the least (except perhaps in connection with the full open Olympiad team). Nor does any senior expect that CS can afford to spend more than at most a minimal amount on contributing to costs of participation.
My personal view is that CS should at least "try" to meet any unavoidable FIDE/ECU/organisational entry fees for all formally appointed national representatives (junior, "open", senior), but that if the money just isn't there, so be it.
No one moreover wants to "raid" junior budgets. Why should anyone even think that that might be the case? That's where the future lies. That doesn't, however, exclude the value of having a rational debate on what's affordable across junior, "open", senior international events.
I also don't ascribe to the view that seniors have somehow "outperformed" juniors or open representatives in any way recently. I find the whole idea of doing this at least a trifle daft. But the over-60s "game" is certainly getting stronger in Scotland and becoming more ambitious. I hope that international success for Scotland at any level inspires everyone, not least to try to do better themselves. It still does me.
There are no easy answers and one of the "problems" is that there are so many international events available these days for our top players - junior, "open", senior. Players have to make sometimes difficult choices and money and time are scarce. I do think that there is scope for more fund-raising. I've done sponsored simuls and talks for the Scottish Junior Chess Association Educational Trust. Bike rides, 10km runs etc can also raise the odd £1K or so if handled well.
We need less whingeing about what others may or may not have done or do (especially by some who don't appear to know what many players at all levels in Scotland have actually done over the years and decades) ... and a lot more thinking outside the box!
Oh, and one thought on coaching ... Nigel Short is actually quite good on this in the current NIC magazine, particularly about the need to expect (Botvinnik-school style) the trainee to be putting in by far the greatest amount of any work! Successful coaching is without any doubt a most difficult art!
We're all in in it together, of course ... across the generations! Happy Christmas!!
Re: Appearance fees for our best players - Angus McDonald - 24-12-2011
Absolutely finally !
Craig, your win in the Senior Blitz tournament happened while we were away in Brazil. I meant to congratulate you. It was inspirational and having a winner from Scotland is what we all want to see.
Many Congratulations on that and also really strong peformances at the full time control.