Matthew Turner wrote:One only needs to look at the ratings to realise that many of the English juniors will find this tournament very tough, but if the players and parents know what to expect then what is the problem?
Actually, I think the fact the England has a smaller and weaker squad than they have had for many years is a positive. The truth is that a significant number of England's better players are turning away from these tournaments and choosing instead to go to Vienna or the Politiken or Riga or the Euro U18 Team Champs. Ultimately that will be much better for the development of their chess.
I defer to those with greater professional experience of the relevant age groups. Mine derives principally from being a parent. If thoughtful professionals - teachers and so forth, including involved parents - think there's no problem, then I'd be wise to take note. But it strikes me that there could be a problem. It's the problem of the mismatch, and its impact on morale within the developing youngster. A few may rise to the challenge of regular setbacks. But most will become discouraged. For sure, we have only a first round. It is likely an outlier, and results will improve. But the potential for mismatches remains throughout. It can't be good; it could get dispiriting. And a thought for the coaches too: how are they to lift the capacity and spirits of youngsters where the ability gap is too wide to bridge in the time to hand?
And is it really better for their chess? Do we have evidence for this oft-asserted claim? Obviously, as part of a winnowing process, those that 'survive' and subsequently thrive provide some evidence. But what, in fact, is the attrition (drop-out) rate overall? I only ask