Posts: 333
Threads: 22
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
3
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but it seems to me that one could hold an opposing opinion for completely valid reasons.
Lets have an example, five Scottish juniors are of the appropriate standard to go to the World Youth Championships, but 2 happen to be in the same age group. The cost of a 'funded' place is "£500 and the cost of an 'unfunded' place is £2,000.
Well we have two obvious alternatives here, the four players who have earned their place as Scotland's number 1 in their age group pay £500 and the player deemed number two pays £2,000, or
The total cost are calculated at £4,000 and are divided between all the players so each pays £800.
Both systems are fair in some ways and unfair in others. You might be in favour of one method, but I don't see why it isn't equally valid to be in favour of the other.
Just announced by FIDE, the U16 Olympiad will probably not happen this year. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.fide.com/component/content/a">http://www.fide.com/component/content/a</a><!-- m --> ... mpiad.html
Posts: 576
Threads: 14
Joined: Aug 2011
Link does not work for me.
If interested the announcement on FIDE website is copied, verbatim, below
At short notice the Kazakhstan Chess Federation has withdrawn from the organisation of the 2014 World U-16 Chess Olympiad and therefore it is unlikely to be held this year.
FIDE Secretariat
sorry the link does not copy across for some reason.
Try this :- <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/7925-2014-world-u-16-chess-olympiad.html">http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... mpiad.html</a><!-- m --> :-?
Posts: 408
Threads: 39
Joined: Aug 2011
Hi Derek,
Just want to confirm that I don't think players attend these events solely or partly with an eye on their CV. My comment was more against the suggestion that improving the CV, having a chess holiday or whatever could be the justification for the expense in attending these events. I certainly know of players from not too long ago who, whose focus was more on the holiday than on the chess.
I would ask if anyone objects to having a situation whereby we are able to select players in every age group, each of whom have the reasonable expectation of scoring above 50%?
The next question is how is that goal best met and setting up that systems that aim to help the players gain the experience and knowledge that allows them to compete. I think by making demands on players (that they make a certain standard) while providing them with the tools and opportunity to earn these rewards, one also sends out a strong message that not only is hard work necessary it is normal.
This can not be achieved overnight but rather gradually and by doing the right things year on year that standards and expectations are raised. But one must have a goal to work towards. I think the training that the squad players are now getting is a brilliant step in the right direction.
Posts: 294
Threads: 8
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Lots of interesting points on this thread.
Think the idea of giving places based on chances to score above 50% has a lot of merit (but there are a hell of a lot of technical issues - what happens if none of the players who don't get the funding from CS but are the players that Fide is technically giving the free accomadation to play (or if they try to claim the accomadation directly off Fide, complaining about what we are doing.) That said, I do think that we should probably try to implement this if it is possible. For example when I was u18 etc then I only got my selections because the likes of Andrew Mcclement, Johnny Scott & Shivan were all born a bit less than a year after me (feel free to point out if this is wrong - I don't seem to have a good track record with age differences on this forum!) and I'm not really sure that's fair (they were a year younger but 200-400 points better...) but Fide do not like players playing up an age group unless they are exceptional at European level. Not really sure if I'd have been too chuffed if I'd been asked to go and pay much more purely so that someone else can get a funded place mind!
I do think we need to be very very clear that these events are brutal - no two ways about it, the world youth it's viable to get a good score with just a couple of upsets (though still far from easy) but the Euro Youth in my experience was really really tough and I don't know how I'd have coped if I'd been good enough to be selected before I was 17/18. I think that these events had a lot of effects on my chess. They were a very strong motivation to get better, both to get selected and then to get strong enough - I was 1667 when selected but put in a lot of work in between losing to a 9 years old Kai Pannwitz (who doesn't even remember the fact that he's beaten me!) and the scottish champs a month or so before the Euro youth in Bulgaria. As for the events themselves, playing 9 games against 2200ish opposition when you are 1900 going on 2000 cannot fail to help your chess if you can deal with the fact that you are losing most games but it is quite tough psychologically, it's not like a weekender where you might have an unpleasant couple of days (0/5 at Edinburgh congress challengers springs to mind!) - this is nigh on 2 weeks often in roasting conditions getting hammered by kids your own age ( not something a lot kids selected to represent Scotland are used to). Not an easy experience when I was old enough to vote, not quite sure how well the average 8 year old is going to handle it and I think we need to try and make sure we are not putting off more kids than we are motivating, but there are no easy answers, I certainly gained far more than I lost but I have always been good at dealing with setbacks (0/5 in first challengers, losing to 9 year olds...) and was quite a bit older than most first time internationalists.
Alan Tate's comments a year or so ago also really hit the nail on the head with another issue, in order to deserve all this money from CS these kids really have to work their socks off to try and be the absolute best they can be,the top players from other countries certainly will be - perhaps selections should be made further in advance and clear targets for the amount of work to be put in made. I appreciate that these kids are just kids and they have exams and social lives and all that but if you are representing Scotland then surely you should love the game and, yes exams have to take priority over chess and social interaction is very important too but Call of Duty and stuff like that? Can't claim to be perfect myself in this regard (though never had an Xbox or Playstation) but I certainly put in a lot of work in the 3 or 4 seasons between being J14 600 and World Youth 2012 Brazil 5/9 (but then I didn't have any social life!)
I am currently in France just now (mostly interrailing) playing in a very small, fairly weak (but fide rated like all french tournaments!) weekender.After my pretty quick game this afternoon against an1800 who played 1.g4d5 2.h4 d53.Bg2 against me (and didn't get down to less time than he started with until he was dead lost) I spent quite a lot of time communicating (in my broken french and his broken English) with the tournament organiser.
He was saying that they have people teaching chess in all the schools in Hyeres (I don't think he meant actually classes as much as coaching in the clubs and running clubs and extra curricular etc.). I ask him whether most other cities do this and he said they do. We looked at the Fide lists for France and for Scotland, France has 9000 active fide players, and judging by Hyeres it has a fifth more players with national elos. The single
biggest thing we can do as a whole is get involved with the schools more I think, and get the sheer numbers up.
Tomorrow I'm playing one of the two other players on 2/2, a 13 year old boy rated 1600 (like I say it's a small tournament...). The reason he is playing here and not in the French junior championships going on just now (which has 1300 players btw!) is that he does not make the top 100 for his age!
More online coaching to improve the existing crop of juniors obviously is useful, I just think we also need to be aiming even higher (easy for me to say these things, where's the money coming from, in Hyeres the council of the region funds it, if only...) Apologies for any rambling and also the formatting, writing this on my phone as no laptop.
Posts: 408
Threads: 39
Joined: Aug 2011
Hi Hamish
Very interesting post!
I did mean to edit my post to make it clear that the '50%' figure could have been any value though I did pick '50%' because it is in practice not often achieved but is achievable. I have said in the past that such a figure need not be fixed but set quite low initially and then raised as time progresses and players and trainers adapt and take advantages of the extra training available etc.
you are quite correct to suggest that it is not a policy that can easily be implemented. One of the key points for me is having objective and measurable targets that help motivate players and drive their development.
For a start there would almost certainly need to be different criteria for players in the U18/16/14 catagories compared to the younger players. In the former there may be more chance to make meaningful use of grades.
Perhaps there should also be a theory grade/qualification as in music. You can only get to play in the U14 if you have a grade >xyz and a theory grad of D.
And/Or perhaps players need to achieve 'norms' at events at home and perhaps abroad?
Posts: 17
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
Mike/Hamish,
All the points you have made are good ones and are already fully implemented in the new selection method.
Posts: 117
Threads: 5
Joined: Aug 2011
hamish olson Wrote:Lots of interesting points on this thread.
Think the idea of giving places based on chances to score above 50% has a lot of merit (but there are a hell of a lot of technical issues - what happens if none of the players who don't get the funding from CS but are the players that Fide is technically giving the free accomadation to play (or if they try to claim the accomadation directly off Fide, complaining about what we are doing.) That said, I do think that we should probably try to implement this if it is possible. For example when I was u18 etc then I only got my selections because the likes of Andrew Mcclement, Johnny Scott & Shivan were all born a bit less than a year after me (feel free to point out if this is wrong - I don't seem to have a good track record with age differences on this forum!) and I'm not really sure that's fair (they were a year younger but 200-400 points better...) but Fide do not like players playing up an age group unless they are exceptional at European level. Not really sure if I'd have been too chuffed if I'd been asked to go and pay much more purely so that someone else can get a funded place mind!
I do think we need to be very very clear that these events are brutal - no two ways about it, the world youth it's viable to get a good score with just a couple of upsets (though still far from easy) but the Euro Youth in my experience was really really tough and I don't know how I'd have coped if I'd been good enough to be selected before I was 17/18. I think that these events had a lot of effects on my chess. They were a very strong motivation to get better, both to get selected and then to get strong enough - I was 1667 when selected but put in a lot of work in between losing to a 9 years old Kai Pannwitz (who doesn't even remember the fact that he's beaten me!) and the scottish champs a month or so before the Euro youth in Bulgaria. As for the events themselves, playing 9 games against 2200ish opposition when you are 1900 going on 2000 cannot fail to help your chess if you can deal with the fact that you are losing most games but it is quite tough psychologically, it's not like a weekender where you might have an unpleasant couple of days (0/5 at Edinburgh congress challengers springs to mind!) - this is nigh on 2 weeks often in roasting conditions getting hammered by kids your own age ( not something a lot kids selected to represent Scotland are used to). Not an easy experience when I was old enough to vote, not quite sure how well the average 8 year old is going to handle it and I think we need to try and make sure we are not putting off more kids than we are motivating, but there are no easy answers, I certainly gained far more than I lost but I have always been good at dealing with setbacks (0/5 in first challengers, losing to 9 year olds...) and was quite a bit older than most first time internationalists.
Alan Tate's comments a year or so ago also really hit the nail on the head with another issue, in order to deserve all this money from CS these kids really have to work their socks off to try and be the absolute best they can be,the top players from other countries certainly will be - perhaps selections should be made further in advance and clear targets for the amount of work to be put in made. I appreciate that these kids are just kids and they have exams and social lives and all that but if you are representing Scotland then surely you should love the game and, yes exams have to take priority over chess and social interaction is very important too but Call of Duty and stuff like that? Can't claim to be perfect myself in this regard (though never had an Xbox or Playstation) but I certainly put in a lot of work in the 3 or 4 seasons between being J14 600 and World Youth 2012 Brazil 5/9 (but then I didn't have any social life!)
I am currently in France just now (mostly interrailing) playing in a very small, fairly weak (but fide rated like all french tournaments!) weekender.After my pretty quick game this afternoon against an1800 who played 1.g4d5 2.h4 d53.Bg2 against me (and didn't get down to less time than he started with until he was dead lost) I spent quite a lot of time communicating (in my broken french and his broken English) with the tournament organiser.
He was saying that they have people teaching chess in all the schools in Hyeres (I don't think he meant actually classes as much as coaching in the clubs and running clubs and extra curricular etc.). I ask him whether most other cities do this and he said they do. We looked at the Fide lists for France and for Scotland, France has 9000 active fide players, and judging by Hyeres it has a fifth more players with national elos. The single
biggest thing we can do as a whole is get involved with the schools more I think, and get the sheer numbers up.
Tomorrow I'm playing one of the two other players on 2/2, a 13 year old boy rated 1600 (like I say it's a small tournament...). The reason he is playing here and not in the French junior championships going on just now (which has 1300 players btw!) is that he does not make the top 100 for his age!
More online coaching to improve the existing crop of juniors obviously is useful, I just think we also need to be aiming even higher (easy for me to say these things, where's the money coming from, in Hyeres the council of the region funds it, if only...) Apologies for any rambling and also the formatting, writing this on my phone as no laptop.
I agree with Mike that Hamish makes a lot of interesting and relevant points in his post.
' Not really sure if I'd have been too chuffed if I'd been asked to go and pay much more purely so that someone else can get a funded place mind!'
As a parent of a child who has worked hard to become the top player in their age group I would be non to chuffed to find that funding allocated to the age group for my child has been used for another player from another age group, albeit with a higher chess grade than my child. Juniors put a lot of hard work into their chess and parents give up a lot of their time and finances to support them. Many juniors strive to achieve the number one spot in their age group and to achieve that precious funded place to play for Scotland.
'The single biggest thing we can do as a whole is get involved with the schools more I think, and get the sheer numbers up.'
I totally agree and have posted on this before :
'Looking at the long term future of chess in Scotland re juniors I believe it would make much more sense to play the numbers game. Chess Scotland should think about a programme which involves setting chess clubs up within Scottish schools. This would allow hundreds of thousands of juniors to experience chess and those who really enjoy playing chess could be encouraged to join their local chess clubs. If only 1% of school pupils involved carried on playing chess into adulthood this would increase the numbers of people playing chess in Scotland dramatically, eg in 2013 there were 673,530 pupils in publicly funded schools; 1% of this is 6735 '
The post made by John Blake the other day had the following link which strongly supports the chess in schools scenario. This article tends to focus on primary schools but in my experience there is a great deal of enthusiasm for chess in secondary schools too. In fact, in my own school, at the end of term pupils will come to me and ask for a chess set and board to play chess rather than watch a DVD 
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay-festival/10801187/Hay-Festival-2014-a-little-buzz-around-chess.html">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay- ... chess.html</a><!-- m -->
Of course, funding is the issue, as always, so why doesn't Chess Scotland put a group together to focus on chess in schools and to look at sourcing funding for this? There are a number of funding possibilities out there. Or maybe this has already been put in place?
|
