Open Letter to the ECF about junior selection

[Alex Holowczak]

It depends on what you want to get out of chess.

I'm not convinced that playing in the World Youth is proportional to improving your chess. If you want to test yourself against stronger players, against whom you can improve, then there's plenty of places to do that in England. E.g. the 4NCL, Sean's tournaments, even local congress opens for the time being. Arguably, playing against other adults is a far better way for players to learn (coupled with coaching as appropriate). Players are far more likely to continue to play the game when they get to adulthood if they involve themselves in adult chess, because they don't have to do anything. Most get to 11, then 16-18, and give up because junior chess because the junior set up falls down at those ages. Conversely, being integrated with adult chess already means you have to do nothing different from what you were before (other than get yourself there). If you want to improve your chess, this is the best way to go.

The real reason to play in the World Youth is the prestige of playing for England, and mixing with the other juniors who you might not have come across. If you want to have fun, opening that up to all is the best way to go.

For me, fun wins every time. Being a young chessplayer is far easier to sell to friends if you tell them you go on trips to play for England. Children at secondary schools would be ashamed to admit they play chess in some cases. If they think you're really good though, it's far more socially acceptable. Otherwise, you're cast down as someone who spends all his time doing something he's not particularly good at. That will not encourage people to continue playing chess...

[Krishna Shiatis]

The real reason to play in the World Youth is the prestige of playing for England, and mixing with the other juniors who you might not have come across. If you want to have fun, opening that up to all is the best way to go.

Definitely!!!!!!

For me, fun wins every time. Being a young chessplayer is far easier to sell to friends if you tell them you go on trips to play for England. Children at secondary schools would be ashamed to admit they play chess in some cases. If they think you're really good though, it's far more socially acceptable. Otherwise, you're cast down as someone who spends all his time doing something he's not particularly good at. That will not encourage people to continue playing chess...

Agreed. Whatever your reason is to play in international tournaments, you should be allowed.

You can certainly learn to play at adult tournament and indeed most of our high standard juniors already do;

This is not something that should ever stop.

It is nonetheless always more fun for children to play with children of the same age at chess. It is an experience which should not be denied to anyone who wants it.

[Roger de Coverly]

Children at secondary schools would be ashamed to admit they play chess in some cases. If they think you're really good though, it's far more socially acceptable. Otherwise, you're cast down as someone who spends all his time doing something he's not particularly good at. That will not encourage people to continue playing chess...

One of England's younger IMs wrote a very apt comment a while back.

He suggested that it is wrong to say

It isn't cool to play chess

It might however be right to say

It isn't cool to play chess badly

[Alex Holowczak]

He suggested that it is wrong to say

It isn't cool to play chess

It might however be right to say

It isn't cool to play chess badly

Again, it depends on how you define "badly"!

I found the 1st team were quite proud of the fact they were in the 1st team, and keen on competitive chess. Conversely, the 2nd team and below were much less enthusiastic, harder to get to turn up, and never wanted to be known to play chess. When I left secondary school, there were a few players who stopped altogether, because the new captain lost patience with chasing them up all the time.

These were no England team contenders. The 1st team were about 100-150, with the 2nd team about 50-100. If you stuck them in the Minor section of a local congress, they might get a point or two, but they wouldn't be in contention to win it. Most people of such a standard are happy to play chess casually, but have no real desire to pursue a further interest.

It's far cooler to be an average playground footballer than an average chessplayer!

This is wandering off-topic somewhat...

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

He suggested that it is wrong to say

It isn't cool to play chess

It might however be right to say

It isn't cool to play chess badly

In this particular case, Mrs Shiatis' son is a very accomplished player and just as good as the one selected to play for England in the World Youth Chess Championships. There is at least one other I know of who is of the same sort of level (but there may well be more), and perhaps another ten very slightly weaker, but who I think wouldn't have been out of their depth in that competition. The only reason I can think of that justifies England not sending more than one player is that there perhaps has to be some sort of player to coach ratio. But if the players are accompanied by their parents, this doesn't really hold water.

[Alex Holowczak]

The only reason I can think of that justifies England not sending more than one player is that there perhaps has to be some sort of player to coach ratio. But if the players are accompanied by their parents, this doesn't really hold water.

There may well be financial implications of which we're not presently aware. I don't know how this competition works financially; does anyone? I.e. does the ECF have to pay anything themselves, and if yes, how much of it is recouped from parental contributions?

[Krishna Shiatis]

In this particular case, Mrs Shiatis' son is a very accomplished player and just as good as the one selected to play for England in the World Youth Chess Championships. There is at least one other I know of who is of the same sort of level (but there may well be more), and perhaps another ten very slightly weaker, but who I think wouldn't have been out of their depth in that competition. The only reason I can think of that justifies England not sending more than one player is that there perhaps has to be some sort of player to coach ratio. But if the players are accompanied by their parents, this doesn't really hold water.

Thank you Jon for your kind words. Very much agreed. I think it is safe to say that there is no argument that holds water that stops a child from playing chess.

Also, imagine the potential if not only Rohan, but the child who is slightly weaker plus the ten other slightly weaker all went - imagine how much they would all improve and what they could bring back to the UK? Each going back to their respective schools/counties/adult tournaments and talking about attending an international chess tournament. I am sure it would inspire many more children to play.

I have noticed that there is always much debate about how to help our juniors. Why are we not asking ourselves how to stop hindering them?

I would also like to mention that all the other countries have figured out the benefits of sending more than one, why have we not? Come on England!!!!

[Krishna Shiatis]

The only reason I can think of that justifies England not sending more than one player is that there perhaps has to be some sort of player to coach ratio. But if the players are accompanied by their parents, this doesn't really hold water.

There may well be financial implications of which we're not presently aware. I don't know how this competition works financially; does anyone? I.e. does the ECF have to pay anything themselves, and if yes, how much of it is recouped from parental contributions?

Yes. The ECF does help the chosen few with some coaching. However, the cost of the tournaments are met by the parents.

Just to be clear. we are not asking for monetary assistance from the ECF. We are not asking for coaching. The ECF can continue what it does with the chosen few. We are not saying that we want what they are getting (though it would be nice - we understand that it is not practical)

All we are asking is that we are allowed to go. That is all. As we said before, there is NO FINANCIAL COST to the ECF for our proposal whatsoever. There really is no logical reason to stop these children from going.

[Carl Hibbard]

All we are asking is that we are allowed to go. That is all. As we said before, there is NO FINANCIAL COST to the ECF for our proposal whatsoever. There really is no logical reason to stop these children from going.

So what is the problem with this?

Is the selection an ECF one or a Peter Purland one?

[Alex Holowczak]

As we said before, there is NO FINANCIAL COST to the ECF for our proposal whatsoever.

The problem there is though, is that the Junior Director is ultimately responsible for this decision (which I guess would come under policy), and he was elected into this position at the AGM a fortnight ago. There was no other candidate. I.e. there was no other person in the country who was willing to put themselves forward to dedicate the time to the job that the incumbent Director has, and will continue to do. I guess your two pathways are either to lobby the current Director to change his mind, or to find a candidate you perceive to be suitable for Junior Director in time for the next election. Then lobby your delegates (not sure where you're based, but you're bound to have several, e.g. your County, County Union, any local league) to vote for him. I reckon the latter is the most likely route to achieve your aim. If only one person is prepared to a job, I think it's difficult to complain that it's not being done the way you think it should be done. After all, if he didn't stand, there wouldn't be any players going to these competitions at all.

[Krishna Shiatis]

All we are asking is that we are allowed to go. That is all. As we said before, there is NO FINANCIAL COST to the ECF for our proposal whatsoever. There really is no logical reason to stop these children from going.

So what is the problem with this?

Is the selection an ECF one or a Peter Purland one?

I am guessing that the final policy decision rests with the ECF committee.

Although truth be told, it is one of the easiest problems to remedy. Alls they have to do is say 'yes you can go.'

There is no cost, no work - perhaps some admin in registering those who are interested. Although once again, they could ask the interested parents to do it themselves....

I am surprised that this policy has remained unchallenged for so long.

I have not yet had a response from the ECF - though it is early days.

We wait with bated breath.....

[Alex Holowczak]

I am guessing that the final policy decision rests with the ECF committee.

Although truth be told, it is one of the easiest problems to remedy. Alls they have to do is say 'yes you can go.'

There is no cost, no work - perhaps some admin in registering those who are interested. Although once again, they could ask the interested parents to do it themselves....

I am surprised that this policy has remained unchallenged for so long.

Actually, the Board will have no real involvement, it'll be down the Junior Director to make this decision.

I have not yet had a response from the ECF - though it is early days.

We wait with bated breath.....

The Junior Director is out of the country at the moment (I gather), and it's only right that the Board discuss it with him, given it's his area of responsibility.

[Stewart Reuben]

Please compare with players in the European Senior Team Championship. This is for players men over 60, women over 50. Everybody is invited who is eligible. BUT it is explained that players under grade 125-130 will almost certainly not enjoy themselves. We have sent as many as five teams, 23 players in all. Everybody pays their own way and it is no burden on the ECF nor Friends of Chess. Since we started sending teams to this event in 2002, Senior chess has started to flourish in England.

Children who would expect to do very badly should NOT go to these various junior championships. It cannot be good mentally for them to be crushed. Some would suffer. That they give up chess is irrelevant, it is their generally well-being that is at stake. But a suggested level can be set and parents, teachers and coaches consulted.

The ECF, John Robinson Trust, British Chess Education Trust, BCF Youth Chess Trust (and others I may have fogotten) only have limited funds. These the young players should compete for. Those who do well enough should be subsidised for their expenses, coach and -if young enough - the expenses of their parents. If a junior should go, but is prevented from doing so, that is a very serious matter. It would be perfectly proper for the ECF to charge a fee to the extra juniors to help defray such expenses and cover the administrative costs, which can be non-trivial.

Were we ever to hold one of these youth events in England again then, ironically, we would want other countries to maximise their entry, not minimise as England currently do. Yet we pioneered several of them, the World Girls, the World Junior, the Glorney-Faber were all first held in our country.

There is a World Under 8 Championship. Why is there a policy never to send anybody to this? I can understand it might often be inappropriate. But to have a hard and fast rule?

Peter Purland is an excellent Junior Director. When he was first elected, and subsequently, he made his policies clear.

Stewart Reuben

[Krishna Shiatis]

I am guessing that the final policy decision rests with the ECF committee.

Although truth be told, it is one of the easiest problems to remedy. Alls they have to do is say 'yes you can go.'

There is no cost, no work - perhaps some admin in registering those who are interested. Although once again, they could ask the interested parents to do it themselves....

I am surprised that this policy has remained unchallenged for so long.

Actually, the Board will have no real involvement, it'll be down the Junior Director to make this decision.

I have not yet had a response from the ECF - though it is early days.

We wait with bated breath.....

The Junior Director is out of the country at the moment (I gather), and it's only right that the Board discuss it with him, given it's his area of responsibility.

Your comment that the board will have no real involvement fills me with great sadness if it is true. How can the future of so many juniors in English chess, rest with one person?

Why is the board not getting involved. Surely this is an issue that affects all of us in chess, young and old.

If we do not allow our children to flourish, then chess in England is doomed to failure. It will remain 'uncool' and only played by old men in dingy halls.

I ask please if anyone from the board is reading this, that we change this policy. This is not a crticism of anyone. This is a simple rquest to change a policy that has no relevance today for our juniors. CJ, Nigel Short GM, anybody who has been a junior in chess and understands, please do something!

We have to move forwards not backwards.

[Roger de Coverly]

In this particular case, Mrs Shiatis' son is a very accomplished player and just as good as the one selected to play for England in the World Youth Chess Championships. There is at least one other I know of who is of the same sort of level (but there may well be more), and perhaps another ten very slightly weaker, but who I think wouldn't have been out of their depth in that competition.

It might not be relevant but the two selected also played in the Major Open at Canterbury. I know I played one of them but the discussion in the bar was how do you play against players where you are twice their height and weight and three to four times their age.