05-09-2016, 09:44 AM
Interesting but why would this sort of 'training' necessarily inspire anyone, who already has a training programme (read most top Scots)?
Why assume that Scotland's top players don't already train sufficiently?
Why (especially) consider that they haven't already worked out quite sophisticated methods of bespoke research and training ... that have, in fact, already got them to the top?
Most if not all top players tend to be doing such training already (or they would drop in the rankings fairly quickly these days), so that artificial methods quasi-imposed by others (even with the best intentions), while they may inspire some, may be unwelcome to others.
Formal training within teams already selected for events (say Olympiads) may be one thing (Russians and others do that pre Olympiads) but can you imagine a Botvinnik wishing others to decide on his training methods and (many) training games (and the experimental ideas/lines tried out in these games) ... or that they should be made 'public' (he kept them 'secret'), far less 'reported' to an international director (why?)?
Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand, Topalov ... right through to Carlsen et al, train in just the same, personal, bespoke and 'out of the public eye' way.
So to come down to a more practical Scottish level, I rather liked one of Jim's ideas: that someone say the international director (performing in this case a more appropriate role) got in touch with a top cadre of players to ask a few Qs about training, such as
1. How do you train (broad outline/system), e.g. research and practice games (not excluding physical fitness and stamina plus psychological aspects)
2. Are you happy with this approach (broadly)?
3. Is there anything that you think CS might do to help you work on and improve your training?
Then draw conclusions.
Hope helpful!
Why assume that Scotland's top players don't already train sufficiently?
Why (especially) consider that they haven't already worked out quite sophisticated methods of bespoke research and training ... that have, in fact, already got them to the top?
Most if not all top players tend to be doing such training already (or they would drop in the rankings fairly quickly these days), so that artificial methods quasi-imposed by others (even with the best intentions), while they may inspire some, may be unwelcome to others.
Formal training within teams already selected for events (say Olympiads) may be one thing (Russians and others do that pre Olympiads) but can you imagine a Botvinnik wishing others to decide on his training methods and (many) training games (and the experimental ideas/lines tried out in these games) ... or that they should be made 'public' (he kept them 'secret'), far less 'reported' to an international director (why?)?
Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand, Topalov ... right through to Carlsen et al, train in just the same, personal, bespoke and 'out of the public eye' way.
So to come down to a more practical Scottish level, I rather liked one of Jim's ideas: that someone say the international director (performing in this case a more appropriate role) got in touch with a top cadre of players to ask a few Qs about training, such as
1. How do you train (broad outline/system), e.g. research and practice games (not excluding physical fitness and stamina plus psychological aspects)
2. Are you happy with this approach (broadly)?
3. Is there anything that you think CS might do to help you work on and improve your training?
Then draw conclusions.
Hope helpful!