A question of behaviour
-
- Posts: 1910
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: A question of behaviour
Nick and David, not at all sure I'd agree with the assumption that 8-year-olds can't benefit from, in particular, knowledge of opponents' opening repetoires. We're talking about 8-year-olds with ECF120 standard grades even before taking into account the influence of coaches etc.
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 3:08 pm
Re: A question of behaviour
When you enter yourself or your child in a publicly available chess tournament you expose yourself to being photographed, recorded and yes in chess tournaments, having your games published and analysed.
Anyone should remember that privacy starts and ends in your house or with the toilet door in public.
The question weather the games should be published or not should have never been asked in the first place and the games just published.
I guess Carlsen can easily complain when he plays a new player for not having the opponent's games to prepare.
When you are a stronger player your opponents will always have "the advantage" of your previous games to prepare against you. It is the stronger's player duty to prove himself in every game. The sooner the juniors and their parents understand this, the better for them
Anyone should remember that privacy starts and ends in your house or with the toilet door in public.
The question weather the games should be published or not should have never been asked in the first place and the games just published.
I guess Carlsen can easily complain when he plays a new player for not having the opponent's games to prepare.
When you are a stronger player your opponents will always have "the advantage" of your previous games to prepare against you. It is the stronger's player duty to prove himself in every game. The sooner the juniors and their parents understand this, the better for them
-
- Posts: 1910
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: A question of behaviour
I’m grateful to all those who have taken the trouble to comment, perhaps singling out Michael Flatt for adding some background information which I had omitted.
My original question was how to respond to those parents who had queried the actions of the minority. It seems that the consensus here is less to condemn any of the parents but rather the ECF for allowing the situation to arise – instead, either all the games should have been published without consultation (the strong majority view) or, failing that, none.
Thank you – that’s instructive.
My original question was how to respond to those parents who had queried the actions of the minority. It seems that the consensus here is less to condemn any of the parents but rather the ECF for allowing the situation to arise – instead, either all the games should have been published without consultation (the strong majority view) or, failing that, none.
Thank you – that’s instructive.