The future - 2011 and beyond.

[GraemeTelBuckley]

I believe that coaching and training is essential (especially for juniors) ... ...

Then why not set up a coaching session for players in your area? You contact the 11-14 year olds in your area to find out interest. Depending on how many you get depends on how many coaches you need to contact but it sounds like you won't have any trouble finding people to come and coach a group of promising juniors for the day. If the first session is successful, then repeat it.

There has to be an overall, co-ordinated and structured strategy which combines training, coaching, ...

I don't see why it has to be co-ordinated and structured. This sounds to me like a lot of time could be wasted on admin. About 15 years ago I was contacted by a chap in Hereford and I coached a group of 6 players in the area. We met every month or two for a while and I thought it worked well for everyone. If we had waited for all of the regions to have something similar, then these players may have missed out...

[Angus McDonald]

This is truly astounding!

The message appears to be that 'parents should be seen but not heard'

Just get your cheque books out!

sorry,

I'll get my coat.

[andrew martin]

I'm not sure I understand the last post at all.

[Leonard Barden]

I repeat that I think that the emphasis needs to be on tournaments. Apart from my wife, is there anybody out there that remembers what it used to be like? Take the Open at the Classic. Much work has been done to put this event on and it is excellent but you will still find half of the competitors are rated below 2100.

Adam Raoof wrote:
Is there scope for widening the list of selection events in future to include events that are not simply junior tournaments?
David Sedgwick wrote"
Yes. Playing in the Hastings Masters could be regarded at least as an acceptable alternative to playing in the London Junior Championships.

I should like to declare my strong support for the two posts above. I note with pleasure that the entry list for the 2010-11 Hastings Masters includes Yang-Fan Zhou, Samuel Franklin, Peter Williams and Ravi Haria, four of our most promising juniors who have their priorities right.

[Alex Holowczak]

Of course coaching/training is important, but parents should not dismiss the limits of what players can do for themselves. Improvement cannot come simply from being taught by others, it has to come mainly from personal learning, experience and development of understanding. I don't see the comparison with what happens in schools and universities as particularly relevant, because the modern attitude cited by Alex is not because this is seen as the route to academic excellence but because many see 'qualifications' as the most important factor in future career success. If one is looking for a brilliant Mathematician one must look beyond exam performance towards one who has a genuine interest and love for Maths, if one is looking for a brilliant Historian one must look beyond exam performance towards one who has a genuine interest and love for History. Similarly with chess. Unless there is a real personal love of the game and desire to improve then ultimate success will for most be limited. But if those two criteria are present then there is an enormous amount that a player can do for themselves.

As long as they have to opportunities to play, which i think in agreement with Graeme and Andrew above, is the most important thing.

I actually think we have enough opportunities to play. For example, the Major Open of the British, Hastings, London, Sean's longer e2e4 events, 4NCL. In terms of opportunities, the existing ones aren't bulging at the seams with up and coming youngsters. While they have good junior support generally, their support is not universal. How do these compare with the 1970s?

I know that one problem that some parents have is that while they'd love to take their children to Hastings or the e2e4 events over half-term, it's often not that easy. Parents might have so many weeks holiday per year, and the rest of the non-chess-playing family might not want to be sat in a hotel for a week. At the moment, there are perhaps 3-4 weeks per year of opportunities for younger players to play in these events. The 4NCL of course plugs the gaps nicely.

Richard is right above, but alas the mentality will seep into other areas. I think the majority of strong young chess players do have the desire to improve, but that's often secondary to other things. Chess will slide down the priorities list for a few months while they concentrate on academic work, or other extra-curricular activities. I don't doubt this is any different from the 1970s, but now the pool is smaller to draw from, you're not going to get the same number of players in real terms with that desire.

I really do think that the same methods in the 1970s aren't guaranteed to yield as much success. Opportunities are obviously important, but I think coaching is far more important than it was forty years ago. I reckon that if you listed all the junior players nationally in descending grade order (above a minimum threshold of, say, 120), and took the mean grade of the uncoached juniors, and then the mean grade of the coached juniors, the latter would be significantly higher.

[David Sedgwick]

I repeat that I think that the emphasis needs to be on tournaments. Apart from my wife, is there anybody out there that remembers what it used to be like? Take the Open at the Classic. Much work has been done to put this event on and it is excellent but you will still find half of the competitors are rated below 2100.

You mean work should be done on putting together strong invitationals with norm opportunities?

All-play-alls with norm opportunities are great as are strong 9 round internationals (which will have norm opportunities if they are that strong). The ARC Young Masters to which I referred to earlier on this thread was just a weekender but it was very strong! If there are regular tournaments like this now then please show me where they are. I remember years ago when I played in the Oakham International and Messrs Parker and Turner were in the junior event below me! Yes, in those days they were probably weaker than I was (and they were obviously younger) but the idea is you have tournaments at the top then rather than allowing lower rateds in the top event, the lower rateds flood in to the lower events.
No disrepect to lower rateds but say you are an ambitious 180+ junior in September. May be you are playing at 2200+ plus by December and maybe it is better for your chess to have some experience where every game in a tournament is against 2200+ and some of your games are against titles players. Maybe you play players you haven't played before. Perhaps you don't really want to play an event where half of your games are against 160-180 opposition. Or whatever the numbers should be. The players 'lower' down play against themselves in a 'lesser' event...
I realise that this all takes a lot of work and I am sure that people are doing what they can with the resources that they have but I still think that the emphasis should be on playing rather than coaching although I am obviously happy to help with coaching wherever I can.

Sean Hewitt is trying to achieve something along these lines with his series of Internationals, surely? In fairness I should also mention the CCF events.

To go beyond that, we need to attract the levels of sponsorship which we achieved in the 1980s. For whatever reason, that seems to have been very difficult in the last 15-20 years.

[Krishna Shiatis]

Krishna,

To correct you on one point; there is no coaching directorship. I am the Manager of Coaching answerable to the Junior Director.

To correct you on another point; we are not dealing with a sport. Not yet.

A final point: you put forward ambitious plans. Now put forward names of people who are going to carry this huge amount of unpaid work out; work moreover which has no guarantee of success whilst we do not have sufficient funding.


Playing a lot in good tournaments is the best way for any level of chessplayer to improve and then learning from the games. Doesn't matter whether it is 1970, 2010, or 3000.

Hi Andrew,

Apologies for getting your title wrong. I will endeavour to make sure that I put manager next time. I do think though, that the key word in your title is ‘coaching’.

As for correcting me about the fact that chess is not yet a sport, it is just this kind of attitude that stops people from recognising it as such. If everybody had my attitude and referred to it as a sport, then this idea would seep into the national consciousness and it would become a reality. We have to believe it ourselves if we want others to accept it. We should not keep correcting people when they call it a sport.

Thank you, yes, I do put forward an ambitious plan. Where would we be in this world without people who did this?

You asked me for names. How can anybody put their names forward when there are no clearly defined roles and no overall plan/strategy? Nobody will volunteer for this. Nobody will give you money for this.

You say you have no funds. This is true. This seems to be the end of it as far as you are concerned. (Or am I mistaken?)

I would say, approach this problem from a different angle. Firstly, break it down into smaller pieces and deal with each, one step at a time.

How much does a progressive, constructive attitude cost?

Take a look at the resources you do have:
1) Parents who are keen for things to improve.
2) Juniors who have the desire to play and improve at chess.
3) Junior organisations already in place, who need guidance and structure.
4) GMs/IMs at the top who do wish to help juniors as best as they can.
5) Tournament organisers with expertise and knowledge who will work with you.
6) Past Junior Directors you can ask for advice, as well as people like Leonard Barden, Stewart Reuben with invaluable skills who would I am sure would be happy to advise on the practical side if they were asked.

Many apologies for any that I have missed, who would and might be willing to help.

These are just some of the resources at your disposal (or whoever wishes to deal with this).

We have recognised that the role of the Junior Director is too much for one person. They would need help.

The first step would be to look at the role of junior director (as you have already done) and talk through carefully about how this role could be broken down.

I say this, because I think that the breakdown you gave could be improved with a bit of tweaking. I would add a couple more roles, but again those are details which could be discussed.

Once you have clearly defined roles and job descriptions (it is important to begin this process now so that people can discuss it and make sure that it is good) then you can ask people to volunteer and put their names forward with their skill sets and ideas and have elections.

If the workload is spread evenly and the roles are not too onerous, people will volunteer. The most important task would be to match the correct people with the relevant skill sets into the correct roles.

I am not saying that you would have a hoard of volunteers nor that all your positions might be filled.

I do believe that if this process was done, then the chances of getting volunteers might be improved.

In terms of timing, it would be good if the setting up of roles and job descriptions was done as soon as possible. A support network around the JD. It would give people time to think and plan if they might want to volunteer. This would obviously be a good thing.

As for your point about playing a lot in tournaments, again, I have already said I agree with this.

I will repeat, that I also believe that to ensure success, (as discussed by Alex H also) coaching and training is essential.
At a national level, an overall, unified, co-ordinated, structured and cohesive strategy for junior chess which combines training, coaching, decent tournament play, inspiring juniors, raising profile and awareness at the same time with a concerted effort to pursue every angle from those at the top is essential and very important.

Chess needs to move with the times and move forwards not backwards. Chess needs to become cool, chess needs increased participation and funding. All of these things are connected.

These are the issues facing junior chess in England at a national level and therefore need to be dealt with at a national level.

[Krishna Shiatis]

I believe that coaching and training is essential (especially for juniors) ... ...

Then why not set up a coaching session for players in your area? You contact the 11-14 year olds in your area to find out interest. Depending on how many you get depends on how many coaches you need to contact but it sounds like you won't have any trouble finding people to come and coach a group of promising juniors for the day. If the first session is successful, then repeat it.

There has to be an overall, co-ordinated and structured strategy which combines training, coaching, ...

I don't see why it has to be co-ordinated and structured. This sounds to me like a lot of time could be wasted on admin. About 15 years ago I was contacted by a chap in Hereford and I coached a group of 6 players in the area. We met every month or two for a while and I thought it worked well for everyone. If we had waited for all of the regions to have something similar, then these players may have missed out...

Hi Graeme,

Thank you! Yes, we have done something like this already at a local level. We do have excellent strategy, input and emphasis on coaching and training at a county level in Kent. One might ask then, why am I campaigning for change at all?

The answer is because I do care what happens nationally. I do understand now, the impact that decisions made nationally have on my sons and what happens regionally. It does not have to be a lot of admin. If it is done properly and set-up properly, it would stand the test of time and be a blueprint for everybody for today and for the future.

I am also looking around and seeing that there is a lack of funding, but if we work together nationally, we can overcome this.

I do think that there are many people who have been around the chess scene for a long time, but there are many more like myself who have just arrived (in relative terms). We do need guidance and support. If this was done in a co-ordinated way, then we are more likely to achieve success.

There is one more point I would like to make which is relevant here. I have noticed that it is the same counties/junior organisations who take the top three places at EPSCA county tournaments every year.

Why is that? I do already know the answer to this. They have (very different) but very strong coaching and training programmes. They may not have done it on purpose or even realise they are doing it, but they do have it.

For example, in Kent, we have coaching days, we have coaches operating in schools, we have the CCF organisation coaching and training, some of whose children filter into the Kent set-up, we have Chris Ward GM and his team spearheading the initiative, we have just set up ACES (Academy for Chess Excellence and Skills) which does weekly training.

In Nottingham, I know that David Levens is working with his team and they have regular training for the children who then filter into the county teams.

Barnet has weekly sessions where the best children come and play together combined with excellent coaching in schools.

Wey Valley/Surrey - well I think that is local to you and you would know that there are excellent trainers in the schools combined with a good structure around this.

That is all well and good for them one might say, but what about the others? This is where a national strategy would help. It could look at what is working for these counties and help those that are struggling and would like help, to plug the gap.

I do believe that if there was a national programme with regular training days and week-ends, combined with specialist training and support in smaller groups for the elite, combined with more help and support and information on the ECF website (junior section), combined with an understanding that we do need to help the parents, then this would be a major step in the right direction.

[GraemeTelBuckley]

... ...I realise that this all takes a lot of work and I am sure that people are doing what they can with the resources that they have but I still think that the emphasis should be on playing rather than coaching although I am obviously happy to help with coaching wherever I can.

Sean Hewitt is trying to achieve something along these lines with his series of Internationals, surely? In fairness I should also mention the CCF events.

To go beyond that, we need to attract the levels of sponsorship which we achieved in the 1980s. For whatever reason, that seems to have been very difficult in the last 15-20 years.

In answer to your question, I don't know what Sean Hewitt is trying to achieve. He is certainly holding many well-organised tournaments and there are other tournaments around but I don't feel that there is any comparison with the field in these tournaments and the field in events that were held pre the mid 1990s. (Please note, I am not criticising anyone, I am simply stating what I believe to be fact.)

I agree with you, somehow we need to attract the levels of sponsorship that we used to attract.

[GraemeTelBuckley]

... ...I do believe that if there was a national programme with regular training days and week-ends, combined with specialist training and support in smaller groups for the elite, combined with more help and support and information on the ECF website (junior section), combined with an understanding that we do need to help the parents, then this would be a major step in the right direction.

Thank you for your reply. I will watch with interest to see what develops and to see what I can do to help.

[Krishna Shiatis]

... ...I do believe that if there was a national programme with regular training days and week-ends, combined with specialist training and support in smaller groups for the elite, combined with more help and support and information on the ECF website (junior section), combined with an understanding that we do need to help the parents, then this would be a major step in the right direction.

Thank you for your reply. I will watch with interest to see what develops and to see what I can do to help.

Hi Graeme,

Thank you! Your help, support and advice would be much appreciated.

Kind regards,

Krishna

[David Sedgwick]

In answer to your question, I don't know what Sean Hewitt is trying to achieve.

Perhaps I should leave Sean to speak for himself, but what I meant was that he's arranging a series of all-play-alls in which players can test themselves against others of similar strength and the successful can progress to the next tournament up. The same is true of the CCF events to which I referred.

He is certainly holding many well-organised tournaments and there are other tournaments around but I don't feel that there is any comparison with the field in these tournaments and the field in events that were held pre the mid 1990s. (Please note, I am not criticising anyone, I am simply stating what I believe to be fact.)

I don't dispute that, but all credit to those who manage to put on the events we do have, be it the low budget ones which I've mentioned or the truly great London Chess Classic.

I agree with you, somehow we need to attract the levels of sponsorship that we used to attract.

We can but hope that the London Chess Classic is the precursor of better times.

[Jim Wadsworth]

I know that one problem that some parents have is that while they'd love to take their children to Hastings or the e2e4 events over half-term, it's often not that easy. Parents might have so many weeks holiday per year, and the rest of the non-chess-playing family might not want to be sat in a hotel for a week. At the moment, there are perhaps 3-4 weeks per year of opportunities for younger players to play in these events.

Alex is exactly right. My son would like to be at Hastings, and would no doubt derive loads of benefit from being there. But given other family commitments we simply can't make it work. (Admittedly as I type this posting said son is playing in the Open at Olympia, with a non-chess playing grandparent hanging around waiting for him to finish ). As always it is a question of balancing priorities, as I am confident is true for all chess players (junior and otherwise) and their families.

[Jim Wadsworth]

Could we/would we be allowed to set up a 'formal group' (parents and interested parties) to discuss this now, for next year, so that the structure at least is in place? Then formal elections could be held next year, when people could put their names forward according to their skill sets and they (and we) would know exactly what is being signed up for and everybody can make informed decisions.

We could do this on this forum and then everyone would be able to see what is going on and how things are being shaped.

Would anyone else be interested in doing this and being a part of the process (I would be happy to be one person/parent)?

I certainly think that there is value in a series of interested parties in sharing openly their perspectives and ideas in various ways including this forum; I would certainly be happy to contribute. (I have been watching this topic on the forum with interest - am yet to participate but will do so when I get the chance.)

I do however think that such an open sharing of ideas is different from a "formal group". If by "formal" one means something with some type of authority (e.g. policy-making or decision-making), then this presumably can only be appointed via official ECF governance mechanisms (e.g. election).

[Alex Holowczak]

If parents want to set up their own independent group to discuss something, they certainly don't need the ECF's permission to do it!

If it wants to have some weight at ECF elections, i.e. by having a vote in the election of the next Junior Director (as well as whatever else may be on the agenda), then they could seek to affiliate their group to the ECF as an Other Organisation. There is no guarantee that Council will accept it though... The annual cost is, at present, £52.

I'm not sure that's necessarily a wise road to go down though...