David Deary wrote,
Quote:If the parents of a junior who is not selected in an age category wish to send their child then they pay for flights, accommodation and food throughout their stay. Surely, it is these parents you wish to convert to the idea of looking at the Czech Open or the British? As, I don’t think it would be good for our reputation internationally if we did not take up the fully funded places at the World & Euroyouth tournaments. Perhaps Robin or Andy could confirm this?[
This is exactly how it works. It is up to the selectors to choose juniors they feel are good enough to represent Scotland. If there are none good enough in an individual age category we do not select them. It is entirely up to parents if they wish to send them to events we are not supporting,
Robin.
David Deary Wrote:The revised grading thresholds (is that a better word than barrier?)
Yes it is. They should be seen as something to aim for, not an obstruction. Personally, I like the word target.
Alan Tate Wrote:David Deary Wrote:The revised grading thresholds (is that a better word than barrier?)
Yes it is. They should be seen as something to aim for, not an obstruction. Personally, I like the word target.
You are just going to be shot down with a comment like that Alan!
Robin,
The selflessness of those who run chess in this country will never be quantified, but I think it is important that what they do should be. Is it the case, like David has alluded to, that no money from the international junior budget is spent on sending players and teams to events, but rather spent on coaching and heads of delegations?
Is this true for all events that the juniors are sent to, or is the Faber/Glorney events different?
If the Faber/Glorney events are different, how much of the budget is spent on this?
Also don't hide your light under a bushel, what other things should be budgeted for but are at the moment being done free of charge by our volunteers?
Gary,
I assume you mean unselfishness!
No money from the budget has been spent in sending juniors to events. The International junior budget is used to pay for coaches and heads of delegation to attend, mainly, overseas events. The Glorney/ Faber events are a wee bit different but parents pay for accommodation for their child plus a contribution to the return transfer costs normally. There is a huge amount of organisational work that goes on behind the scenes at all of these events and I can assure everyone that the coaches, heads of delegation and chaperones are out of pocket every time,
Robin.
Gary McPheator Wrote:Alan Tate Wrote:David Deary Wrote:The revised grading thresholds (is that a better word than barrier?)
Yes it is. They should be seen as something to aim for, not an obstruction. Personally, I like the word target.
You are just going to be shot down with a comment like that Alan!
And the award for most helpful post of the year...
Ladies and gentlemen
Some foods for the thoughts.
Geek is chic! <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.zazzle.co.uk/geek_chic_t_shirt-235816670339927979">http://www.zazzle.co.uk/geek_chic_t_shi ... 0339927979</a><!-- m -->
Can we work with a top clothing outlet and some fresh fashion designing talent to create a look for our International teams that as well as being practical for our purposes would create fashion fever.
Brain food. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://sportales.com/sports/fish-for-champions/">http://sportales.com/sports/fish-for-champions/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://chessqueen.com/images/NorgeEnPR201105.pdf">http://chessqueen.com/images/NorgeEnPR201105.pdf</a><!-- m -->
Surely Scottish Salmon is better than Norwegian, for kids of all ages.
Just a couple of appetisers this evening. I’ll leave you all to your grading discussion, while I muse on whether using “Do not underestimate the dark side of the force” as the flash phrase on a photoshoot featuring the Greenwood Gambits dressed in black and the Kilmarnock team dressed in white would get me into trouble with the owners of the Star Wars copyright.
Oh, now I’ve got a classical arty idea – I wonder if GM John Shaw would be up for a starring role in a 21st century remake of the last supper with Joe Parks, Jim Kleboe et all, as disciples.
I think I’d have to be careful about who portrayed who on the dark side.
Quote:You like swimming analogies i.e. Some of the young swimmers (15 year olds at the Olympics) are smashing pbs almost as quickly as they are setting them. How would you keep pace of an advance like that in Chess while employing grading limits.
In swimming you do get these dramatic improvements but most of these young swimmers at the Olympics that did were already world class and had earned the right to compete on merit. The UK swimmers not only had to meet a certain qualifying time but had to do it in the final of a specified event AND be in the top two. That is tough - some did the qualifying time in the semis but won in a slower time while others did the time but came third. In neither case were the swimmers selected.
In Scotland to get into one of the national training squads you need to achieve certain well defined times with the aim of getting a certain number of swimmers within the world top 15. As their policy document states by setting and publishing these times this makes it gives the coaches and swimmers clear targets to work towards. The following quote I think is interesting:-
Quote:The improvements are a result of the hard work undertaken by coaches and
swimmers. Scotland now has a strong pool of swimmers within the National Programme and now is the
time to start squeezing the standards, and asking more of our coaches and swimmers if we are to push
for greater international success in the future
One of the reasons for the chess selectors to define grading targets it makes a clear and strong statement to players, coaches
and parents of what is required to be an international class player, and not just a good Scottish player. This is especially true when the pool of players is so small that getting to no 1 in your age group is not a sufficiently strong test of a player's strength.
Personally I thing the swimming targets are too rigid and I think some discretion is required on the part of the selectors. In swimming you do get two entry times specified for competition entries - a qualifying time and a consideration time. The former means you get in for sure, while the latter means that you can apply to swim but whether you do will depend on the event organisers. A similar system could be applied in chess: those achieving the qualifying grade are automatically selected and those the consideration grade are added to a squad from which selections will be made. Initially these grades can be set at a relatively low level and then gradually increased over a number of years as (and if) standards are raised.
I would also add that I would generally give priority to players that have demonstrated their strength over a period, so that greater weight is given to their published grade. If they are fast improving from a low base and miss out this season then if it is a genuine step forward and they continue to progress they will get their chance the following season.
Mike,
Thanks for some detailed info about Swimming. Unfortunately I'm now back to thinking there's not much 'transfer of skill' between swimming and chess.
I don't see a problem with listing the average grade of graded players competing at the Euroyouth and World Youth each year. Perhaps that could be used as grading guidelines. 70% is too steep in my opinion.
If we can start off aiming half way up the list we might just attain it. These though, shouldn't be rigid guidelines but may be useful for parents in knowing what standard their youngsters might be up against if they enter these tournaments.
I'm always wary of limiting people's freedom of choice though and if a player is the top in his country they should have the choice to enter to represent their country even if they havn't made the guidelines.
imho