Forums

Clement Sreeves Wrote:If you think these grading limits are severe, you should feel sorry for the Dutch- I was talking to Wouter Spoelman (rated 2580 at the time) at the World U20 last year and he told me that in general you had to be 2600 to take part- they made an exception for him!

You say we should reward the top 3 of each age-group - this doesn't make sense because obviously some age-groups have a number of strong players, while others have few. Even if the limits are lower than what I suggested, I still feel this is the right approach.

Disagree Clement. Grades were never designed to be used in this way. Some individuals, through no fault of their own, will be at a big disadvantage by this system. Your approach doesn't necessarily make it more likely that more players in the stronger age categories would go abroad anyway, it just makes it more likely that fewer in the lower age categories would be eligible. ;P

Quote:Hugh, I’m not sure we are talking about cutting funding to top players quite the opposite we are talking about pulling funding from Juniors and moving it to our top players. In my view the current split between the International Junior budget and International Budget should remain the same.

Sorry David, missed this earlier. Absolutely agree, it's been said earlier - including by the original poster - that we do seem to be fielding pretty strong teams in Olympiads. I don't think there's any need to divert further resources in their direction. Just don't think we should step back from that level of funding either.


It probably won't come as a surprise to anyone that I absolutely support Clement and Dougie's suggestion of grading floors, with two caveats to which I doubt they'd object. Firstly, the specific rating levels required should be arrived at after a bit of analysis and discussion, as I'm sure they inevitably would be. Secondly, the rating criterion should not be completely inflexible- if the selectors strongly believe that a particular player is seriously underrated then they could still be considered for selection. Again, I'm sure that this rule would be followed as a matter of course.

As referred to earlier, if we do continue sending squads of the size we're currently selecting, then I really do believe that it's imperative to do something about coaching. The people there work fantastically hard, and it's great that our older and stronger juniors are prepared to contribute, but I don't think that gives the likes of Andrew and Ali a fair chance: if we've got a situation where some countries' strongest juniors have one-on-one preparation with titled players before games, while ours are generously helping younger players prepare, the disadvantages are obvious. I think there should be a ratio of coaches to players (perhaps somewhat dependent on the average age, but it would be a useful guide nonetheless) that we shouldn't dip below - not having been at any of these events myself I'd defer to the judgement of those who have on what this ratio should be. With the exception of concrete preparation in specific lines we shouldn't be expecting anyone to straddle both categories.

Two things I'd like to throw into the mix

Firstly the next Junior Worlds is in Europe, the next 2 are South Africa and UAE. Should we be sending a bigger squad to the next one given the following 2 are going to be very small, hell yes

Secondly on grading limits, This is something we have bounced around for years, we could take to the empirical data that everyone is talking about and that is the Grading list. If you were to look at the "lower graded" players that have gone in the last few years and looked at their grading increases after they have gone to the Worlds / European you will notice a very distinct pattern. Their grading shoots up greater than the others around them. What is causing this?

I think it was last years worlds, that Phil told me that one of the party had asked if a chess playing friend could pay to go along, but not to play (Phil will correct me on dates). After a discussion it was agreed. That person did not play but did join in with the coaching, the result? That person is now playing way above where the level that they were.

So going to the event and losing is part of the storey but it is not the full one. The kids get a lot of benefit and come back stronger players who can then cope the next time they are there. It has been said before, these tournaments are the only way they can get the experience of these tournaments

And Mike, you keep using swimming as an example, why not use something like yachting where you have to be the best in your group to represent your country, irrespective of "grading"

For my final point, in chess terms we are practically a 3rd world nation, was it not for the fact we have GM's we would be. We are one of, if not are the smallest of the so called medium sized nations. We should be delighted that people want to represent their country and that their parent are equally supportive by funding it

However you spin it those advocating grade limitations are putting barriers in the way of Scotland's best juniors representing their country. We have to deal with where we are and try to get better. Discouraging people from the start is unhelpful. The Euroyouth and World Youth are fantastic events and children do come back keener and stronger players with a very good idea of where they are and what they need to do to improve.

Who are all these kids who are playing at the Euros and the Worlds that need weeded out by grading floors?

Alex McFarlane Wrote:Without knocking the overall benefits of playing in something like the world junior - and such an event should certainly be the target for all up and coming juniors, most of our junior players (in purely chess terms) would gain more from playing in the Open or Major of a couple of weekend congresses with the services of a coach at the event to help with post mortems.

A bit of work between events on the errors made would provide dividends.

But surely that happens anyway. Most play weekend congresses. Most have a coach to review their games subsequently.

Playing in a weekend congress where you play 2 games a day and don't have any opportunity to prep for your opponent is totally different from playing at the Euros or the Worlds.

Mike Scott Wrote:I have already said that there should be other events that could be used as alternatives, that would be more appropriate level, and which would almost certainly be cheaper to attend - allowing players to play in them more frequently. For example there are regular events held in Budapest (First Saturday). Indeed there has been some move already in this direction with Murak (?) and the sending of the U16 team to the Olympiad.

On the other events, part of the problem is timing. Parents may be willing to take their kids from school (and schools may authorise absence) for the Euros or Worlds but not if it is some "random" tournament in Europe.

There is then still the issue about coaching support, If it's limited for the Euros and Worlds then it's presumably non-existant for other tournaments.

Yes, Mureck could be different as it takes place in the summer holidays and this year the squad were lucky to have Phil as HoD and coach, but being stuck in a small guest house with no internet access and miles from the nearest shop is possibly not the best environment to have a successful tournament.

Derek,
I would not list names simply because that is not fair but I would not exclude Jonny from the list certainly on his first tournie, when he really struggled: which was a mixture of inexperience and not being strong enough to compete.

I simply look at the grading list and do not see where the players are who have benefited from the existing policy. Andy claims there are some players but has produced no evidence. I am actually sure that there will be some players who are better players for the experience but that really is not the point. Have a look sown the lists of past participants and you will find quite a number for whom it was one of their last events and/or who have not significantly improved in strength since.

My experience of these events has been that yes a lot of chess is played but the training and practice was somewhat relaxed and ad hoc.

To me its about whether you are serious about it or not. Do you want players to just have an experience, or to be as good as they can be at chess?

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.fide.com/index.php?option=com_fidecalendar&view=fidecalendar&ny=2012">http://www.fide.com/index.php?option=co ... ar&ny=2012</a><!-- m -->

This is a link to the official Fide events for 2012. A couple of things worth noting is that they have moved the Euroyouths at Prague to August which follows closely on to the EU youth at Mureck, Austria. If we were going to use additional events, then the Czech Open at Pardubice (incorporating the European Amateurs Championship) is a strong possible. I have written a previous piece a while back labelled the Czech Open for older juniors. Guys like Alan Tate will probably want to concentrate totally on their own norm chase, but it always has strong Scottish players of 2000+ level in other sections, who may wish to help, but we can't expect them to do it for free.

Robin.

With talk of grading limits for Scotland's elite juniors.

Perhaps we should have grading limits for would be coaches for the Scotland elite juniors.!

I know that rules me out but in this new drive to drive standards up sacrifices have to be made.

I'll get my coat.

Mike Scott Wrote:Andy claims there are some players but has produced no evidence. I am actually sure that there will be some players who are better players for the experience but that really is not the point. Have a look sown the lists of past participants and you will find quite a number for whom it was one of their last events and/or who have not significantly improved in strength since.

Would be wrong to name names but looking at the previous noticeboard there are plenty of examples

Quote:Of 20 players who travelled to Liverpool in July every single player has increased his/her grade since then. Not just that, the average increase has been 87 points in 4 months. And that before anyone benifits from the 200 up rule

Quote:Lets look at the events played since Euroyouth by the returning U12 players

I see the Lothians allegro only
xv -21 performance
y Grade plus +386 performance
z Grade +595 performance

And that is before I go through and do the calculations of grading rise for people selected over the last 5 years

Angus McDonald Wrote:However you spin it those advocating grade limitations are putting barriers in the way of Scotland's best juniors representing their country. We have to deal with where we are and try to get better. Discouraging people from the start is unhelpful. The Euroyouth and World Youth are fantastic events and children do come back keener and stronger players with a very good idea of where they are and what they need to do to improve.

Angus,

You have totally hit the nail on the head!