Open Letter to the ECF about junior selection

[Jim Wadsworth]

That might be fine for adult events (and no doubt his opponents wouldn't complain because it would be an easy win for them), but what good will it do for the development of up-and-coming youngsters to go the World/Euro events and end up playing against opponents who also might know barely nothing about the game ? Alternatively, what good would it be for a youngster of that low level to go and get mauled by the very top players ? (OK, people might say they can learn through the experience of playing them, but is that really what the World/Euros should be there for ?)

This can happen anyway in these junior events. FIDE make no attempt to impose minimum rating standards or restrict the number of participants from individual federations. The only limits are those that individual national federations choose to impose.

We saw a lot of this in Georgia - loads of unrated "home" players (some good, some bad, some indifferent). So much so that one member of the England team faced 6 different unrated Georgian out of 9 games. Which at £190 or whatever a game was a tad disappointing. I would argue that for these events each federation, including the hosts, should be limited to say 3 players per section. However, money talks and the organisers want to maximise the entry. Maybe have a parallel Open event alongside the official event?

Like Jack, not every English IM or GM played in International Junior events when younger. Of the recent GMs, Steve Gordon only appears to have been selected once, for the under 18s when he was already approaching FM/IM standard.

I may be wrong but I think David Howell went to a few of these both before and after getting his GM title.

[Roger de Coverly]

I may be wrong but I think David Howell went to a few of these both before and after getting his GM title.

Whilst some, like David Howell, were selected almost every year from about the age of 10 onwards, there were others who were hardly ever selected and developed to a high standard regardless. It makes the point that it isn't essential to play in these events.

[andrewslade]

7. Long term development

As a parent of a fairly strong young player, I would love having more guidance and more structure for his development. Like I am sure all parents do, I talk to people on the circuit – coaches, other parents, older players and try to work out what’s best for Matthew. But I am to a large degree making it up as I go along. My perception is that other countries are better on this sort of thing. Money is a part of it, but I bet if we were more organised we could do better than we are at the moment.

So a plea to finish on: can we channel some of the laudable energy currently focussed on debating selection policies into the (I think much more important) topic of development?

I couldn't agree more. My son is also is a fairly strong chess player (although not in Matthew's league - yet!). If you are "making it up as you go along" what hope is there for the rest of us?! I have only become involved in the chess scene due to my son's interest and I have found it very difficult to know which tournaments he should be entering. Like you, I would love to have "more guidance and more structure for his development."

By the way, how do you (and Matthew) manage taking time off work/school? Matthew must have a very understanding headteacher.

[Roger de Coverly]

I have only become involved in the chess scene due to my son's interest and I have found it very difficult to know which tournaments he should be entering. Like you, I would love to have "more guidance and more structure for his development."

Michael Adams' father wrote an account of his son's development. Although this was nearly 30 years ago, many of the tournaments and events are still going strong.

http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Adams-Dev ... 093&sr=1-2

[Jim Wadsworth]

I have only become involved in the chess scene due to my son's interest and I have found it very difficult to know which tournaments he should be entering. Like you, I would love to have "more guidance and more structure for his development."

Michael Adams' father wrote an account of his son's development. Although this was nearly 30 years ago, many of the tournaments and events are still going strong.

http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Adams-Dev ... 093&sr=1-2

thanks Roger, hadn't come across that one. Will take look. You remind me that more recently Gawain Jones's mother wrote the below, which Mrs. Wadsworth and I have both found helpful.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Survival-Guide- ... 633&sr=8-1

[LozCooper]

[quote="andrewslade"]

I couldn't agree more. My son is also is a fairly strong chess player (although not in Matthew's league - yet!). If you are "making it up as you go along" what hope is there for the rest of us?! I have only become involved in the chess scene due to my son's interest and I have found it very difficult to know which tournaments he should be entering. Like you, I would love to have "more guidance and more structure for his development." [quote]

Whilst I don't claim to have all (any?) of the answers I'm happy for any parents and/or kids to contact me either by private message or via [email protected] if they think my advice may be of help.

[Krishna Shiatis]

I can't comment on history, but the schedule for those events my son has been involved in has typically been along the following lines:

8.30 breakfast
9.00 - 10.00 preparation with coach - review opponent's track record on available databases, decide what opening/lines to play, etc.
10.00 - 11.30 review games / openings recommended by coach
11.30 - 12.00 rest
12.00 - 1.00 lunch
1.00 - 1.45 rest
1.45 - 2.00 team meeting
2.00 - 3.00 travel to venue, get settled in
3.00 - game starts
whenever game finishes (anything between 5pm and 7.30pm - say 6pm average) - travel back to hotel
6.30 - 7.00 review game with coach (own game and team-mates's games)
7.00 - 7.30 dinner
7.30 - 8.30 carry on reviewing day's games
8.30 - bedtime go for walk, have a chat, generally relax. At some point collect the pairings for tomorrow's game and look up opponent on available databases.

[bedtime, if you are Matthew's age, being as close to 8.30pm as the parent can get away with]

Either way, little to no time for "holiday" activity other than on the single rest day, on which the players are generally so tired all they want to do is hang around the hotel. Other than immediately before or after the game, little opportunity to socialise with other countries. I haven't seen Lawrence's post, but yes it is almost all work. A holiday it is not. If you want relaxation these are not the events to come to.
(for further details see my recent write-ups on Georgia for further insights.... http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?p=6710)

Mmmmm. Interesting. More change needed here methinks. This is bonkers.

Perhaps a little balance?

" All work and no play makes Jack a sad loser."

(For the technical dudes, this is my own quotation)

[Krishna Shiatis]

How many countries have the policy of "any who can can pay can play".

If the number is substantial I would ask - why do we have a different policy.

I've heard it said that Junior Chess here is not doing comparably well. One would assume that we could learn a thing or too from elsewhere ?

Does a supermarket with a failing performance and loss of market share tell it's shareholders - "yes other companies have better results, but we don't need to look at the strategy of our competitors to ascertain why they are doing so much better" ?

Hi all,

Taking on board looking at the strategy of the competition in this context, as put forward by Peter R, I could not help but notice how many players the Russian (and ex- Russian federation) are submitting in contrast to us.

Is it just coincidence that they have many more GMs (even taking into account population factors) than we do?

Does it help them that so many more of their kids (and Peter Andreev - I consider him one of ours especially as he still lives in London) are being encouraged to particpate in the name of Russia in these International competitions?

Remember numbers are important because more involvement would naturally result in more money into the National body/coaches/tournaments/chess infrastructure, this is turn would result in more investment into juniors and others, this in turn might/should result in more success, which in turn would bring more kudos and in turn hopefully more involvement.

The Russians submitted over 100 kids to the worlds compared to our 10. (Population factors taken into account, still leaves our numbers somewhat short)

Are they sitting there debating about whether sending more is a good idea?

Regarding numbers, have they got it completely and utterly wrong?

How do we close the gap?

Is it time for change?

[Krishna Shiatis]

Mmmmm. Interesting. More change needed here methinks. This is bonkers.

If you are so opposed to the schedule, which presumably has been devised by the head of delegation and the chess coaches. I dont understand why you are so keen to change the selection rules to allow your child to attend.

For why we are keen to attend see ealier entries.

With regards schedules, I am saying (having seen a real life one), that they should change.
As with selection policies etc.

Clearly, attendence on our part would be subject to any changes. I would not subject Rohan to this. I would favour a balanced schedule. That is just me.

Change is what we are proposing not non-participation.

[Richard Bates]

To answer a question asked implicitly by some others in relation to the schedule, i.e. is it necessary to do this level of preparation and review etc.? Maybe, maybe not. But when you are in an environment when essentially all the other teams and players are doing at least the same amount of preparation, I would argue it would be somewhat naive to not do so yourself.... It is also arguably the most valuable aspect of these events from a developmental viewpoint.

Well i will maintain that the most valuable aspect, as with any strong tournament, is the playing. Don't get me wrong, i'm not suggesting that work should be a complete optional extra. But i don't think comprehensive pre-game preparation is consistently necessary to the extent that it seems occurs, given the negative effects on performance that it can have. Detailed opening work, building a comprehensive and varied repertoire can be done outside of tournaments, pregame preparation should effectively be revision or a bit of tweaking where it appears gaps in the repertoire have been exposed. Sometimes 5 minutes is enough, sometimes a couple of hours. Again, I agree that the extent of database coverage has made it perceived to be a slightly different world today, but i don't see that just because "everyone is doing it", overworking children to the point of fatigue is necessary. My openings are pretty rubbish today, (although i still usually manage to get by however much people prepare for me), but because for years i have done very little of the former (general out-of-tournament preparation) whilst never doing much of the latter. It was hardly ever something that was exposed at World Junior tournaments.

I also appreciate that the coaches are trying to build a "team/group atmosphere", but i don't see why everyone has to spend hours going through everyone else's games, when sometimes they just need a break.

Incidentally, one unfortunate consequence of the lack of strong older players is that in the past they could and would often step in and take some of the burden off the coaches, especially in the post-game environment.

[andrew martin]

The coaching and work schedule for participants at these events is balenced and in my view,fine.
What is wrong with:

Work with coach
Review of work and preparation alone
Possible review of prep with coach if any difficulties arise
Rest
Game
Analysis of game


This is where the kids really learn about chess. This is not a chess holiday.


I'll just amend this a little: if anyone can suggest an alternative schedule which makes sense, based on experience at these tournaments, I'll certainly consider any ideas very carefully.

Andrew

[Jim Wadsworth]

i don't see why everyone has to spend hours going through everyone else's games, when sometimes they just need a break.

They don't have to. Totally optional. Some players choose to participate in and contribute to the review of their team-mates' games, others choose not to. Depends on the individuals, the time of day, whether a given game is particularly interesting or not.

[Alex Holowczak]

I'll just amend this a little: if anyone can suggest an alternative schedule which makes sense, based on experience at these tournaments, I'll certainly consider any ideas very carefully.

How do other countries do it? This isn't to say that their way is necessarily better than England's, but it might be interesting for comparison.

[Jim Wadsworth]

Mmmmm. Interesting. More change needed here methinks. This is bonkers.

If you are so opposed to the schedule, which presumably has been devised by the head of delegation and the chess coaches. I dont understand why you are so keen to change the selection rules to allow your child to attend.

For why we are keen to attend see ealier entries.

With regards schedules, I am saying (having seen a real life one), that they should change.
As with selection policies etc.

Clearly, attendence on our part would be subject to any changes. I would not subject Rohan to this. I would favour a balanced schedule. That is just me.

Change is what we are proposing not non-participation.

After each of the World/Euro trips that my son Matthew has been on, the parents of participating players have done some form of "post-event review" to provide feedback to the coaches and Junior Director. As far as I can recall, one area which has consistently been praised and where no changes have been recommended by those who have experienced it is in relation to the coaching approach and schedule.

[Krishna Shiatis]

As stated by Krishna:

Clearly, attendence on our part would be subject to any changes. I would not subject Rohan to this. I would favour a balanced schedule. That is just me.

Change is what we are proposing not non-participation.

Per Bob C:

I think it is one thing to criticise a selection policy and ask that more juniors attend.
It is quite another thing to criticise the work undertaken by the delegation and coaches while they are there.

Per Krishna:

The delegation and coaches are not there any more. (The trip to Georgia was back in September I believe).

If something is inherently not right (and I feel that it is not) then I believe that it is important to express my concerns about this while I am asking for change. That is after all what this forum was set up for.

Per Bob C:

Your statement above that you would only attend if this regime is changed to my mind precludes you from selection anyway.

Per Krishna:

Absolutely agreed. That is not to say that we can not change/improve the situation and introduce balance to the timetable. Andrew Martin did seem flexible in his approach. If this happens, then of course, we are no longer precluded!

See also comments by other ex-junior chess players. I believe that one of them (Simon Ansell) said he would have given up chess if he had to do that.

We have to inspire our youngsters not drive them away.