Forums

Calum,

I think we should be aiming for 3 strong players at each age group. When we have had that in the past and only sent 1 because of exams, resources, selection process, whichever then I think it's an opportunity missed. The door is more open in the last few years for all of reasonable strength who wish to play and can fund it to go.

I actually think it's yourself, Clement, Adam, Andrew and others with the support of organisers who will get a squad strong enough to play at these events (Euroyouth and World Youth) to do reasonably well. Hopefully you''ll enjoy the process and it will help you all challenge higher. The attraction to me of the British and Prague would be to allow the coaches to also play and challenge higher and in time off from their own games coaching the juniors. This could be good but not to the detriment of the Euroyouth and World Youth participation. imho.

I do recognise Mike's point about players struggling to score. I still think it was right to try to spread the net wide. You just don't know what talent you might catch and encourage that way.
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.

Get all the talents involved in helping the players at these events. At the lower age groups a 1300 to 1700 parent could work intensively with the younger players with the No 1 coach working specifically with the older higher rated players.

I think the squad is building and I look forward to someone out of the dozen of so top under 18s breaking through. They are all capable of it. in my opinion.

Probably best to clarify where I stand. I am against grading limits/barriers whichever you choose to call them. I think the board of selectors have an important job to do and a common sense approach is more important than fixing rigid guidelines. A couple of (thinly disguised) examples...

Player X is the best player by 200+ points in his agegroup, is recognised by all to be one of the best young talents in Scotland but falls 70 points short of the "grading limit" for Euroyouth etc.

Player Y is a rapidly improving younger junior that is still progressing at a dramatic pace. His grade though is only around 1000 but he is achieving 14-1500 performances and is on a very steep learning curve.

It is the selectors job to apply common sense to these examples. It would be wrong in my opinion to be tied down to grade,

Robin.

I would like to just make a couple of comments about specific issues raised on this thread.

Personally, I am in favour of rating barriers as guidelines to help selectors. This is partly based upon my own experience at the Euros in Montenegro in 2006. I have always felt that I was not ready for such a tournament. As a result, I did not compete in either the Euros or the Worlds until 2009 - when I thought I was ready. At the end of the 05/06 season I was rated 894. I believe a sensible rating barrier would have prevented me from competing at this time. That tournament contrasted greatly with my experience in Italy in 2009, where I got 5.5/9 playing some good chess and learning a great deal.

However, I must admit that 2100 for J16 is somewhat overoptimistic in my view. My suggested barriers (for boys) would be 110*age, giving 1980 for J18 and 1100 for J10. I would base this on CS rating, as FIDE is not always representative of true playing strength. For juniors, especially those who gain a FIDE grade at a young age (and thereby a correspondingly low grade) it can be very hard to work their FIDE grade up to their true playing strength. For girls presumably different barriers would be used.

I realise that this is a contentious issue for many people. However, a good point has been made that selectors would be able to use their own judgements in borderline cases - as Hugh says, no-one should suggest that these are absolute. In fact, I would recommend that they were reviewed every 2 years (for instance) by the Junior selectors in order to change with the times.

The definition of success at these events is always difficult. As has already been pointed out, it incorporates the score achieved at the tournament with the chess learning gained from participation. Both are important - everyone going to the tournament should hope to achieve a reasonable score (according to their own expectations) and to have learnt new things. I remember an allegro tournament where I achieved the wonderful score of 0/6. Needless to say, I wasn't exactly happy about it - and had learned very little from the experience (apart from some good practice at losing graciously?). Learning is best backed up by positive emotions. Losing all one's games tends to leave the mind blank with grief.

I think the idea of older/more experienced juniors helping younger juniors is a good one. I for one would be quite happy to give up some of my own time to try and help another junior using a combination of Skype and Playchess. However, there would be the danger of stronger players pitching ideas at too high a level. Even so, I do not see how anyone could lose out by such an arrangement. Of course, it would also be wonderful for me to have coaching from the top Scottish GMs paid for by Chess Scotland, but in these cash-strapped times it might be difficult to achieve - which brings us back to the subject of how to raise money.

It is good to see so many people taking an interest in junior chess on this forum and I believe that debate is always healthy in any topic.

Finally I would like to wish the rest of the Euro Youth squad the best of luck for the tournament. I look forward to having Hugh as Head of Delegation - and I hope to have some interesting discussions about Tanzanian politics...

I think it is important to understand that we have a duty of care to ensure that the kids are enjoying their chess. I agree with Calum on the idea of looking 7/10ths down an entry list as a rough guide as the sort of level that is appropriate for an event, just because you know that they will score and pick up some good scalps. There have been examples in the past of kids going to some events when clearly not ready, and coming away so demoralised that they give up chess. This has happened. If one child has done that it is too many imo.

Although I never went to any Euros and Worlds, mainly due to an incredibly strong age section, I have personal experience of grim events where I was not ready. I entered Opens far too soon, and came away with some shocking scores, and did contemplate giving up on a few occasions. I would also say this was detrimental to my development, as I was looking for ways to scramble draws rather than play good chess. It has only been recently that I have got over this and have started to improve again. Would going to a Worlds have improved my chess? Maybe, it is hard to say. Would going to something a bit less harsh with the same format have helped? Definitely.

Part of the problem at the moment is that there is nothing really between Glorney and Worlds/Euros. The idea of sending juniors away to events with a coach that is level appropriate is a very good one. There are events all year quite close to home, where you will find u1800 fide sections and the like, that would be a great opportunity for them.

7/10ths down an entry list suggests limits changing according to each event. I mean the entry list is just up for the Euroyouth. How are you going to plan ahead for that? Andrew McClement's guidelines (if guidelines absolutely have to be imposed!!??) are far more sensible.

Discretion of selectors then again is much more sensible. Got to give them some credit for having some idea of who's got some ability!! and some idea of how to get the playing strength up without having to use too much of the stick.

Angus McDonald Wrote:7/10ths down an entry list suggests limits changing according to each event. I mean the entry list is just up for the Euroyouth. How are you going to plan ahead for that? Andrew McClement's guidelines (if guidelines absolutely have to be imposed!!??) are far more sensible.

Discretion of selectors then again is much more sensible. Got to give them some credit for having some idea of who's got some ability!! and some idea of how to get the playing strength up without having to use too much of the stick.

You can base it on previous years. Variation in this is not going to change too much. The reason I prefer 7/10ths to Andrew's one, is purely because grade and age is not a linear relationship, it is parabolic. The again, as you say discretion has to be used. Give or take 50 around that limit is fine.

I believe it is a good thing that this discussion has broadened from the initial focus on funding, after all it makes sense that we should know how we are going to spend our resources before trying to secure them.

I am sure everyone involved in chess in Scotland wishes all those who represent our country on the international stage all the very best of luck in thier endeavours. There is differing opinions on how best to develop the talents of our junior players, but these should not be seen as attacks on our young players.

Around 40% of the CS budget is allocated to the international directorships with just over half of that going to the junior international pot. It would be good to see a break down how this is spent in order to see if it could be spent differntly for the benefit of junior devlopment.

I wish Angus and others well in their efforts to achieve more funding from goverment sources, but fear that these efforts may be fruitless if focusing on inernational participation as opposed to junior development more generally.

Gary,

Fair comment and every member of ChessScotland has a right to know how each individual directors budget is being allocated. I have been trying to be particularly tight on the International Junior Director budget this season because of future concerns of the grant. Things you may not find itemised are people spending their own time....

a/ doing an Asda online shopping for all at Liverpool for hours on end.
b/ paying their own travel and digs at events even though they are allowed to claim them.
c/ coaching at major events for accommodation and travel expenses only, no fees paid.

I could go on for some time. This is not new, it is a norm in International junior chess in Scotland to try and make ends meet,

Robin.

Angus McDonald Wrote:

Quote: I have learnt that when I feel very strongly about something it usually means there are other motives at work.... I wonder what they could be?]

Please enlighten me, I check my motivation on a daily basis. I try to make it as altruistic as possible. Are you suggeting I have a bad motivation?

I have lost all motivation to continue this discussion for now but pleased to see others contributing =)

The revised grading thresholds (is that a better word than barrier?) from Andrew are more palatable but I’m not sure if we actually need them. Would they make the selectors job any easier? I don’t think so, I think we should leave the selecting to the selectors. (Phil will be pleased I’ve said that! =o)

A point I would like to raise is: are we seriously talking about not selecting players for certain age brackets if they don’t meet the grading threshold by 100 points? Surely recent form and tournaments performances should come into consideration?

On the cost to CS:
The selected player in each age category gains a fully funded place (ie accommodation & food) at no cost to CS. Flights are then paid for by the parents and I believe CS pays for a Coach and the costs for the Head of Delegation.

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?

I would also add a caveat to this based on my experience: I usually seek funding from Daniel’s school as I am sure many other parents/relatives of other players do. It is easier to sell the World Youth or Euro Youth to them than Czech Open D/C and alleviates some of the financial burden on parents. For the other tournaments you may not find schools as receptive in their support.

Ultimately, I like the idea of sending squads to the Czech Open, British et al and believe they could be very beneficial but lets not abandon the Euro Youth and World Youth.