Posts: 462
Threads: 14
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
1
Although globally weak, 2300 is being used here as a figure as it is round about the minimum requirement to get into the Olympiad team. Something you could easily achieve in 2 years with a little work, certainly not 8 hours a day. You must have enjoyed working on chess at some point, Joe?
Money is unfortunately a big factor due to lack of opportunities in Scotland. I am fortunate enough to have family support, without which I would be working for minimum wage in a rented flat and not playing chess.
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
Lack of money and lack of a 'chess culture' are the 2 main problems in Scotland.
I am currently in Slovakia, a country of similar size and population to Scotland, but which has 10 times as many members as CS, countless tournaments, local/regional/national leagues, and where players above 2300 will generally be paid for whatever chess match/tournament they are playing (travel/hotel and 50+ Euros per game for a Saturday/Sunday league fixture).
All the teams have sponsors, usually local companies with a strong connection to the club, many of whom also pay for training sessions/coaches. The national teams are paid through the Slovak Chess Federation for Olympiad, etc. participation
This means that very good players (2300+) can, if they don't want to be rich, make a living from chess - or at least keep chess a a major part of their lives. This in turn gives an incentive to strong, promising juniors to continue with the game and push that bit harder to break through to the next level.
Tournaments in Slovakia (and Czech Republic) are invariably played in hotels with special room rates/deals for players to stay and are generally either rapidplay events (over 1-3 days) or FIDE-rated Opens (over 4-9 days). Evening leagues and FIDE-unrated 'weekenders' are relatively unheard of.
Scotland simply doesn't have that chess culture and chess infra-structure. It's not impossible to replicate such a situation (and I'm only using Slovakia as an example because I know it and it's of a similar size to Scotland, not because it's 'best practice' for producing and keeping more and stronger players) but I would think it highly unlikely.
Posts: 72
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2012
Alan Tate Wrote:Although globally weak, 2300 is being used here as a figure as it is round about the minimum requirement to get into the Olympiad team. Something you could easily achieve in 2 years with a little work, certainly not 8 hours a day. You must have enjoyed working on chess at some point, Joe?
Money is unfortunately a big factor due to lack of opportunities in Scotland. I am fortunate enough to have family support, without which I would be working for minimum wage in a rented flat and not playing chess.
Yes I used to enjoy working at chess when I was younger a lot! I still enjoy playing chess (from time to time), I just don't particularly have the motivation or time these days with working a full time job. I probably regret that I did not put in more effort when I was younger to reach my full potential, but then again it was never going to be a full time career in Scotland.
My advice to any young aspiring young player is to put in the effort now while you have the time, unfortunately though as you say money is a big hurdle unless you have support from family.
Posts: 550
Threads: 37
Joined: Nov 2011
Quote:I am currently in Slovakia, a country of similar size and population to Scotland, but which has 10 times as many members as CS, countless tournaments, local/regional/national leagues, and where players above 2300 will generally be paid for whatever chess match/tournament they are playing (travel/hotel and 50+ Euros per game for a Saturday/Sunday league fixture).
All the teams have sponsors, usually local companies with a strong connection to the club, many of whom also pay for training sessions/coaches. The national teams are paid through the Slovak Chess Federation for Olympiad, etc. participation
and Andy they have nearly 100 titled players compared to Scotland's 37
Posts: 978
Threads: 92
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Kevin: "What does Chess Scotland gain from being represented by ageing GM/IMs who have been in decline for many years? ...Step aside relatively old men, forsake your subsidised holiday and give the youngsters a chance.
..The team could easily have been Greet (there might be a couple of arguments for leaving him at home)
Tate Sreeves ... +any number of 2100+ guys under 30 years of age.They might have finished 9,671st. So what?
You can invest in the future, or invest in the declining present.Then again, we all love a subsidised holiday"
These GMs/IMs are not in decline. They have maintained their ratings. The 3 QC members deserved their place in the team as did Scottish Champs Alan and Roddy.
No reason to give Alan a place ahead of John. John performed better.
What has Clement won ?
Why should an under 30 be preferred vs an over 30 ? Is ageism allowed ?
Being selected is a reward for positive achievements and if it is perceived as a holiday then it is well deserved for previous hard work.
Posts: 35
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2011
If ageism is allowed, then I would apply it, to some degree.
Try not to forget that those who are relatively old now, were once upon a time younger, and had all the benefits that brings.
And before you all take this far too seriously -
The Equality Act 2010 allows for "Objective justification" (differences of treatment on the grounds of age can sometimes be justified).
Not that that is particularly relevant here, or that I have to justify an opinion.
So, would I positively discriminate based on age? Absolutely yes.
Ooh, what a bad person.
Posts: 207
Threads: 18
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Hi Kevin and any other budding ageists!?
It's perhaps fortunate that you didn't air some of these views to a certain Viktor Korchnoi, who was still playing at a level higher than any Scots player has ever reached on the rating list (quite apart from the reputational list that really counts for these things) well into his mid-70s. Believe me you wouldn't have escaped alive!!
Seriously the only criterion that should really count is straightforward merit. Moreover the CS selectors also apply wider judgements on that score than mere "ratings", which are much 'over-rated' themselves these days, and they sometimes do so. So what's the beef? Are you seriously suggesting that if Scotland had a 75 year-old Korchnoi available, he shouldn't play in the Olympiad team?
Chess culture, or at least its differences between Scotland and much of the continent, is indeed part of the problem. My old Berlin Bundesliga club has recently asked me to turn out once or twice next season in Bundesliga 2 North. I've warned them I'm a dinosaur but they insisted!!
Norm-seekers - put in some hours and go play chess mainly abroad where you will find that you play many stronger opponents, will learn more and gain rating points. That's how most Scottish title seekers got somewhere, going back very many decades. Enjoy chess.
Posts: 35
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2011
CP Wrote:Seriously the only criterion that should really count is straightforward merit. Actually, I seriously don't agree.
Victor Korchnoi is clearly an exceptional man. Last I heard he wasn't playing for Scotland. If that happens we could address the situation.
This debate is already highlighting the lack of opportunities for younger players in Scotland. Why not help them rather than hinder them.
Your solution appears to be...
CP Wrote:Norm-seekers - put in some hours and go play chess mainly abroad where you will find that you play many stronger opponents, will learn more and gain rating points.
No doubt that's true. But utterly impractical for most people.
How may I ask is a young person supposed to finance that? Whilst almost certainly being a full-time student or having a full-time job.
Posts: 978
Threads: 92
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
Guys , if you want under 30 teams for the 2016 Olympiad , eg dob 1987 onwards, this is what you get (grades as at August 2014)
OPEN
Sreeves (2242), Tweedie (2219), MacQueen (2212), Bremner (2193), McClement (2191)
Captain: Edwards
WOMEN
Roy (1913) , Lampard (1600), Milton (1561), Espinosa (1543), Reid (1524)
Is this what we should send to Azerbaijan ?
Posts: 188
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2011
I think one of the biggest differences nowadays is that you play lots of players under 2100 in tournaments. Looking for example at the tournaments Colin McNab played 20 years ago, there were very few players of that level.
My most recent 9 round events:
Commonwealth: 6/9 were under 2100
London Classic: 5/9 were under 2100
Scottish congresses if I'm lucky I'll get one game against Steve Mannion, 95% of players are under 2100.
This is clearly not the only factor, hard work is more important, for most people it's hard to find the time though.
|
