Grading local school chess games

[robin moore]

I noticed on the update today some Lanarkshire school results on the main grading database list. Can someone please explain to me why ChessScotland are grading these games (and for free)?
It's great that plenty of primary schools in some areas have kids actively playing chess but the results are irrelevant for grading purposes. A far as I can make out, virtually none of these children play outside their school or area. By grading these games on the main list they are achieving artificially high and totally false grades which needlessly clutter up the order as far as Scotland wide junior grading is concerned.
These children are never considered for international selection purposes ( certainly not by me when I was a selector).
Would it not make more sense for the organisers of these school events to have an internal "ladder" structure independent of ChessScotland to reflect their results?

[mclarke]

Hi Robin,
As a committee member of LJC (a chess scotland affiliate); and the area grader for LJC and someone who also co-runs a primary school chess club, I would argue that they should be graded.

1. The majority of the labour intensive work is carried out by the area grader - while not-zero, I would have thought the cost to CS to doing the grading is marginal. Although Douglas Bryson I'm sure would be able to comment.
2. Those who advocate non-grading should understand that we will end up with a schism and the position of two grading systems. I do not see how that is in the interests of children playing chess - nor in the interests of other organisers! While most of the LJC events are closed, we have 1 or 2 a season that are open - it would be difficult for us to know how strong a child is - and what event to place them in and how we seed them fairly. 3. The reality is that LJC offers a child c. 30 graded games a season (possibly less this season ) - looking at Lothians top juniors who have not progressed to regular adult events; most of them are doubling the amount of graded games by playing against other juniors in tournaments run by other junior organisers. We are not going to accurately understand the progress they've made if those matches are under two systems - they take their graded games more seriously.
4. When a child shows progress in their game, they get better results, they earn trophies and some kudos that comes with an improved grade.
5. I believe that not only should junior chess be thinking about players for internationals, we need to be thinking about how we turn primary kids into club players - its important to get and keep them engaged if we're ever going to turn them into club players.
6. There will of course be edge cases, where a child dominates a 'small pond' and does not often venture outside that pond. But surely the better way to address this is to somehow recognise and adjust for that in the grading system (I'm sure DB would be able to say if its possible). If we can't, its not perfect - but I'd hope our IJD and the Junior Board don't mind the little extra work?

There are bigger problems for domestic junior chess - a shortage of volunteers, the availability of venues and price hikes in lets being the key ones LJC have been battling most of the summer.

[robin moore]

Martin,

I want to be clear that I am advocating not grading events played by fellow classmates at school. These grades are built up by playing the same children continuously and often equate to hundreds of games. The grade is completely false and often artificially way too high.
If children play in organised NEJCA, LJC or CFK and similar events all sections should be graded as they are now. If children playing at school level wish to attain a grade the option is there to achieve one very quickly at these excellent events.

Let me tell you about something that happened while I was a selector (I still have the emails). The Liverpool Quadrangular selections had just been completed when I received an email from a very selfish local junior organiser telling me that all selectors should resign as they hadn't selected a child from his area. He had informed this child's father who was now in the process of taking out an injunction in order to stop ChessScotland competing in the event even though accommodation and transport had been paid for. This child had built up a completely false grade by simply playing against schoolmates but the father had been convinced by the local junior organiser that it was accurate. Thankfully, the father backed down and CS were able to attend the event.
Some time later this child was wrongly selected for a full international (I was no longer a selector). This child couldn't even write the moves down and was unclear on some rules. Needless to say this child was humiliated and lost every game, never to play chess again. I don't wish that situation ever to occur in the future.

[mclarke]

Hi Robin,

Sorry, I wasn't clear about my logic - and re-reading I've missed a step. I think if a junior organiser was stopped from grading games of a school that they support - they would question whether they should continue to support the CS grading system at all (i.e. run an alternative). In turn it would probably mean that the junior events they support would not be CS graded, causing genuine issues for tracking the progress of young juniors not playing adult events yet.

I don't know the specifics of the case you've raised - I am sympathetic too it. But, I think it'd be better to consider an adjustment or cap for a genuine 'big fish/small pond' player in the grading system. The other immediate solutions would be:-
* to exclude 'in-school play' for international selection - for a graded player, a selector could use the excel spreadsheet.
* go back to the Primary Individual being the selection event for the Quadrangular.

Martin

[Douglas Bryson]

Oh I do love these junior discussions.

To answer the initial points.

CS grade any all-junior event free of charge as a service to junior organisers. Grading these events is to encourage the children to keep playing by having numerical feedback on their improvement. Most juniors will go up if they continue to play - not least since points are fed in by additions. The bulk of the work is, as Martin indicated, done by the organiser who compiles the data but CS time is spent on checking the accuracy of the player data - doublers, spelling, dob etc - and in dealing with program issues.

The actual numbers produced may not be massively accurate (especially as indicated if the range of opponents is limited) but works in terms of promotion of the game. It doesn't impact on the overall grading database since any false grade will soon be self-corrected when they meet more accurate grades.
If doing well in all-school events a player might try an all-junior w/e event.

Selectors are always made aware of the limitations of junior grading. eg Any junior from the central belt has an in built bias in their favour by having more opportunities to play.

You would expect that any improving junior would want to advance from all-school or all-junior and try playing adult minor events. This indicates a serious attempt to better their play and the accuracy or otherwise of their grade will soon become apparent when meeting the stable grades of adult opponents.

However these are all considerations for junior selectors.

[robin moore]

Hi Martin,

A simple "ladder" system at school would probably be sufficient. Players in each class or year can only play others within say six places higher or lower on the ladder. Competitions can still take place with players seeded by their ladder position. Do they really need to be graded ? I don't feel they do and at the end of the day is it going to spoil the children's enjoyment of playing chess whether they are officially graded or not?
As a prize for children that do well, free entry into your local LJC or similar organised graded event could be of interest. That's not to say of course that other children can't enter, I want them all to do so!

Turning to the school games "grading cap" . This is a very interesting option that I hadn't considered at all. If you made the cap say 500, that could encourage the best children who attain that to head to their nearest Under 600 section at a local organised junior event.

For years now, despite the Primary Individual being only six games of half hour each or so, it has consistently and accurately identified the best Primary schoolchildren in Scotland, a great many of whom go on to represent their country at International level for years to come. I would urge all children who are offered a place at this top event to try and attend as it's such a fantastic fun social event apart from the chess. I am fairly certain David Congalton will be building it into his future selection plans.

To add to Dougie's post- In my opinion juniors that are connected to organised adult clubs such as Bon Accord, Castlehill or Edinburgh tend to have more accurate grades, perhaps not from a quantity aspect but certainly on the average quality of their opponents. At Primary Individual level these children stand out.

[Ianbrownlee]

This forum has been locked at present on the request of President, Chess Scotland. Issues have been received that are currently being examined and we respectfully request that no further publications on this topic take place. The topic and thread may or may not be re-opened at a later date.