02-07-2015, 08:08 PM
PeterReidSmith Wrote:First of all, I don't know the SC/SJC history/politics and don't really care. What I do know, from direct experience is that the SJC tournaments are an excellent incubator to attract, encourage and support young players. It horrifies (yet does not surprise) me to see that they don't get the support and recognition they deserve. As to the fact these provide gradings on the main list, I'd suggest that also encourages these young players - talk of "distorting the main list" is misplaced ; if anything (based on what I've seen) a great many are consistently under-graded.
Really agree with this Peter - my oldest has only started playing tournaments - over the past 4 months, he's had the opportunity to play > 20 competitive games thanks to SJC - and while competitive games are only part of the mix, he's a far far better player for having played those > 20 games than not. He's also played c. 12 games in the LJC setup. So thanks to both SJC and LJC.
I also agree on your point about gradings - re: strength just look at the giant killer list on the main page! Having just recently started doing the Area Grading responsibilities for my sons school; if you've not done it I think its easy to underestimate how much work the AG actually has to do to submit the results. The grading system is an asset, but I would think that the cost to CS is marginal (Obviously Douglas would know more!) and that their is value to CS in engaging juniors is high (data point of one, but the nudge for Aiden joining CS was access to live gradings).