Child Genius - the representation of chess

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
PeterFarr
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
Location: Horsham, Sussex

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by PeterFarr » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:09 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:If Mr Williams does not want to talk or meet with AM, and prefers just to continue to snipe at him on this forum for the next six years as well, then it would be a good idea to suspend his account on the next occasion. That is simply not what this forum is for at all. And then he can spend even more time in his %%$$£ garden and at his dining table.
For Mr Williams' benefit, its possible that Mr Rogers was a little upset by this:
Peter D Williams wrote:Do you play chess?
- given that Mr Rogers is somewhere around the top 100 players in the country.

Its quite easy to upset people by accident isn't it? Sometimes its best to accept an apology, or just that someone didn't mean to cause offence.

Angus McDonald
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Angus McDonald » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:17 pm

Jonathan,

A more pertinent question might be what was the intention of this thread and what was the purpose of the author?

I accept what Andrew Martin has subsequently stated.

As to who is sniping at whom I'm not so sure but! I do think you are sniping at Mr Williams irrespective of how strong a Chess player you are.

User avatar
Peter D Williams
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Hampshire

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Peter D Williams » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:25 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:If Mr Williams does not want to talk or meet with AM, and prefers just to continue to snipe at him on this forum for the next six years as well, then it would be a good idea to suspend his account on the next occasion. That is simply not what this forum is for at all. And then he can spend even more time in his %%$$£ garden and at his dining table.
I want Mr Martin to explain why he did not make a complaint to channel 4 about the wonderful thing he says he said about Peter that where left out of the film. Cant be that hard a question to answer?

Only the mods can suspend an account you do not have that power :wink:

Any way its almost 4 pm so no more posts from me until next week unless account is suspended lol

Time to check greenhouse :D :D :D
when you are successful many losers bark at you.

PeterFarr
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
Location: Horsham, Sussex

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by PeterFarr » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:32 pm

It wasn't Mr Rogers that drew attention to his chess playing strength, it was me.

Also Mr Rogers asked a quite reasonable question as to why Mr Williams refused to meet Mr Martin unless he wrote to C4 to complain about their handling of Mr Martin's comments.

Perhaps Andrew just didn't think there was any point, given that he has already explained to everybody what else he said but that got edited out; I don't know, but if Mr Williams agreed to meet Mr Martin, he could ask that question directly.

Either way, Mr Williams didn't answer Mr Rogers' question, and decided to ask him instead whether he plays chess, which given that this is a chess forum, is somewhat remarkable.

Angus McDonald
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Angus McDonald » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:39 pm

Peter,
Yes Mr Rogers didn't draw attention to his chess playing strength. Accepted.

By some responses though we were all expected to know?

What about my question though. What was the intent and purpose of this thread?

Does anyone e.g question the Polgar sisters contribution to Chess?

They worked hard at the game under their parents supervision I think.

Andy Murray e.g went to Barcelona at a young age to do more or less nothing but tennis.

Why are strong Chess players questioning (in my opinion) the validity of Chess as something worthwhile to do?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19264
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:49 pm

Angus McDonald wrote: What was the intent and purpose of this thread?
I had presumed to discuss issues surrounding the Channel 4 program Child Genius.

The Williams family had featured on an earlier edition of a similar show. Those at the British Championship Congress at Canterbury in 2010 may recall the filming of Peter junior's participation in the British Championship. Unfortunately for the film makers, there weren't really any dramatic moments, like beating or even playing Mickey Adams.

Angus McDonald
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Angus McDonald » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:53 pm

It does appear to me that being clever is something to be frowned upon. Having an intellectual talent isn't cool but if your child is a talented swimmer getting them to the swimming pool for 2 hours training before breakfast is fantastic.
That child swims like a fish! Little wonder! I'm surprised they havn't grown gills to prove it :-)

Edit! Thank you Roger

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:03 pm

I am very happy to get back to the original topic of the thread, ie child genius. I was criticising Mr Williams for throwing us off course, for what is by no means the first occasion (and I believe it will not be the last, unless he is moderated) with his obsession with AM's brief clip in a TV programme shown some six or more years ago.

And I don't care that he doesn't know whether I am a chess player! (perhaps at this precise moment only the ECF can answer that, in any case :wink: )

There is no agreement as to whether child prodigies (of the Adams/Short/McShane class) should stay at school. Even each of those three went separate ways - Adams left school in all but name at 16, Short made a more serious attempt at A-levels, I think, and Luke went to Oxford. However I think the pace of life at the top in the chess world partly answers it for us. You will very likely be over 2600 by the age of 16 already if you are destined for a good career in playing chess (though maybe we can substitute ages up to 19-20 in cases where the young player came from a country with few playing opportunities and perhaps a low starting rating).

More generally, I can think of many more highly talented people who regret ending up as chess "professionals" than regret seriously studying some good academic subject, despite that the latter is far more normally undertaken. This is one distinction from most other genius sportsmen. I believe that most chess players can trasfer their intellectual skills, if only they are willing to do so.

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3497
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)
Contact:

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Paul McKeown » Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:39 pm

Peter D Williams wrote:I want Mr Martin to explain why he did not make a complaint to channel 4 about the wonderful thing he says he said about Peter that where left out of the film. Cant be that hard a question to answer?
Andrew Martin has answered your question in depth on several occasions. You simply don't want to accept his answer, perhaps because of a desire to blame someone accessible for the editing of a low grade television programme, rather than choosing to blame the distant and impersonal organisation that commissioned, produced and broadcast that programme. Anyway your postings on the matter come across as both peevish and tedious.

Peter Sowray
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Peter Sowray » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:55 pm

Do parents, or the children themselves, get paid to appear on these types of shows? Is there serious money to be made?

Andrew Martin
Posts: 844
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 4:37 pm

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Andrew Martin » Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:16 pm

There is probably serious money to be made by individuals or organisations encouraging parents to think their child is a genius and then milking the situation to the hilt thereafter.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1327
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Alan Walton » Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:24 pm

If somebody gives up any activity just on one persons comments (whoever they are) proves that maybe they are not going to succeed in that field

In life we all have people who criticise our abilities, that shouldn't mean just giving up, if anything it should spur them on to disprove those comments, and say I told you so

Angus McDonald
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Angus McDonald » Fri Jun 21, 2013 10:50 pm

There is probably serious money to be made by individuals or organisations encouraging parents to think their child is a genius and then milking the situation to the hilt thereafter.

I think this is fair comment. Although, Peter junior has done enough to show that he is extremely talented. I would like to see you and the Williams sort this out because I do think that Chess is an innocent bystander in this milking of the situation for lack of a better expression. Peter senior is a talented coach also. I'd like to see you sort out your differences. I think you've given a bit of an olive branch. Could you draw a line under things by stating that Peter senior had the right to decide the education of his son. I think you've done that already but perhaps once more to show that you do indeed think that the whole issue was milked for the gain of neither of you.?

regards
Angus

John Hodgson
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:13 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by John Hodgson » Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:29 am

Angus McDonald wrote: Although, Peter junior has done enough to show that he is extremely talented. I would like to see you and the Williams sort this out because I do think that Chess is an innocent bystander in this milking of the situation for lack of a better expression. Peter senior is a talented coach also. I'd like to see you sort out your differences. I think you've given a bit of an olive branch. Could you draw a line under things by stating that Peter senior had the right to decide the education of his son. I think you've done that already but perhaps once more to show that you do indeed think that the whole issue was milked for the gain of neither of you.?

regards
Angus
I am shocked that anyone could think this. It seems to me that Andrew Martin has acted perfectly honourably and should not be required to respond further to a minor incident that happened years ago and seems to be referred to too often by one party.

Angus McDonald
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Child Genius - the representation of chess

Post by Angus McDonald » Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:52 am

John,

Andrew has authored this thread. He knows the sensitivities. I watched the 4OD programme yesterday. Andrew does comment to Millions about someone elses son. It's not your son and it's not your decision that is being criticised in tone by the programme in my opinion. Andrew states they edited the programme to suit what they wanted. I accept that but he is still on the record saying what he said. It's obviously been quite distressing for the Williams family. I've been there to a degree because I was elected onto the School Board at my children's primary school many years ago. Bad move! Head teacher didn't appreciate a parent asking questions about the School. Same Primary School Michael Gove went to by the way! My son did though have his leg ripped open on a wire fence being held against it by another pupil whilst there Eventually I took my two sons out of the School and home schooled for a while. It was too much for me! and we put them back into another Primary School later. In terms of natural justice this was Andrew commenting on Peter's son and not the other way round, e.g Peter commenting about Andrew's son. That is why I think Andrew owes a little tollerance to Peter's request.
Also I admire The Williams for being able to Home School their own child. It's not an easy thing to do and there has been quite a hostile position taken to this from some authorities. I wouldn't be happy if someone commented to Television about my children either. I agree with something Andrew did state about being sympathetic also.
Last post on this matter. Angus McDonald

Locked