06-09-2017, 10:10 AM
I have some sympathy with Andy's view and have said so in the past. (I also think it is to the detriment of Scottish chess and the junior players in particular.)
However I must disagree with "get the GMs, the IMs follow, then the 2200s etc etc and everyone joins in."
Look at the British tournaments which have GMs and IMs (and FMs) but there is still a shortage of 2100s and 2200s competing. It is the absence of these players which make norm chances difficult in a 9 round event or exaggerate the swing effect (easy opponent-tough opponent) in any tournament.
I'm afraid that protecting grades and ratings harms chess. Andy's (and others) greatest service to Scottish chess would be to be selfless and play tournaments to allow others to progress. This could also have the benefit of improving his own performances in the future as more players come through. And just in case I'm seen as attacking the oldies, I also think that youngsters can think too much of their grades/ratings and are not prepared to experiment with new openings etc to improve further.
However I must disagree with "get the GMs, the IMs follow, then the 2200s etc etc and everyone joins in."
Look at the British tournaments which have GMs and IMs (and FMs) but there is still a shortage of 2100s and 2200s competing. It is the absence of these players which make norm chances difficult in a 9 round event or exaggerate the swing effect (easy opponent-tough opponent) in any tournament.
I'm afraid that protecting grades and ratings harms chess. Andy's (and others) greatest service to Scottish chess would be to be selfless and play tournaments to allow others to progress. This could also have the benefit of improving his own performances in the future as more players come through. And just in case I'm seen as attacking the oldies, I also think that youngsters can think too much of their grades/ratings and are not prepared to experiment with new openings etc to improve further.