Low graded players teaching chess

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.

Do you think one should be ECF 150 above and do an exam before teaching with chess in schools?

Yes
8
20%
No
30
75%
Yes but higher rating
0
No votes
no but lower rating (please comment)
2
5%
 
Total votes: 40

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Tue Jan 03, 2017 11:40 pm

I know several low graded (below 100) who are teaching for chess in schools and frankly I think its disgusting as they misinform kids who are too young to discard the nonsense which comes out of their mouths.

I have passed translation agency tests with the best agencies in the world despite idiot teachers telling me I was useless from 8-22 and run a successful business/charity and am disgusted to see similar people "teaching" chess.

My personal belief is that people should be or have been graded 150 ecf and pass an exam before teaching: what does everyone else think?
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

Mike Truran
Posts: 2391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Mike Truran » Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:12 am

One of our club members graded around 70 has massive success and great feedback coaching at our club and in local schools, and is undoubtedly the main reason why our club has such a flourishing junior section.

"Disgusting" is a very intemperate word. It seems a little ironic that despite apparently having been told how useless you were for 14 years, you seem very happy to tell other people how useless they are.

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:23 am

Mike Truran wrote:
"Disgusting" is a very intemperate word. It seems a little ironic that despite apparently having been told how useless you were for 14 years, you seem very happy to tell other people how useless they are.
Its my personal opinion that I wouldnt be good enough to teach chess. I am not saying they are useless, just that with a grade beneath 150 there is too many holes to be teaching! I know one of them worked very hard and I have a massive amount of respect for him, but I think his teaching of kids is inappopriate.

For me psychology and playing against d4 holds me back, and I would LOVE to teach but I don't!. My personal opinion is those that can't, me included SHOULDN'T teach.
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1719
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:49 am

By the same extension of your argument primary school children should only be taught (for example) maths by a PhD mathematician or science by a qualified nuclear physicist. Which of course isn't the case, most primary school teachers have enough grasp of the subject to be able to teach it at a basic level, plus of course a certificate in education that gives them the ability to stand in front of a classroom - a skill I doubt many of us have.

If you have a specific example of a teacher who is teaching children basic things that are wrong then this should be raised; either with the teacher themselves if they are receptive to feedback or with the school or CSC (if you're referring to that organisation). However I suspect that, as long as children can gain access to a stronger tutor when the time is right, the odd bit of duff information isn't going to do too much long term damage.

But of course we could prevent anybody graded under 150 from teaching chess. It might lead to quite a few school and juniors chess clubs being shut down ...
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:06 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:By the same extension of your argument primary school children should only be taught (for example) maths by a PhD mathematician or science by a qualified nuclear physicist.
I would put a PhD mathematician equivalent to a 230 player so no.

I think a 150 player understands most basic chess concepts and can play well enough in OTB situations to pass on knowledge.
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1719
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:14 am

Joshua Gibbs wrote:
I think a 150 player understands most basic chess concepts and can play well enough in OTB situations to pass on knowledge.
I think a U100 player can. A U65 player (and don't forget grades measure your performance against other players foremost, rather than giving a definite indication of playing strength) should be able to teach children how the pieces move and basic tactics and openings. I agree that the weaker the teacher is, the more likely it will be that their pupils will reach a standard where the teacher can't teach them anything else.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18164
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:26 am

Joshua Gibbs wrote: I think a 150 player understands most basic chess concepts and can play well enough in OTB situations to pass on knowledge.
At the lower levels I suspect it's more a question of teaching how to play a legal game of chess and avoiding creative nonsense such as opening 1. h4 and 2. Rh3 . Basic checkmates as well. Beyond that, perhaps imparting the wisdom that trying for four move checkmates with e4, Bc4 and Qh5 doesn't really work but there's more to chess than the positions arising from 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 and similar.

You might hope dogmatic rubbish was avoided as well. I once saw a comment that was obsessed with not moving the same piece twice. Thus the very normal sequence in the Scotch of 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nxc6 was condemned because the Knight moved three times.

I've seen Russian inspired training material that started with an empty board. If you've ever wondered why players from the former Soviet Union had an excellent understanding of Kings Indian and other Bg7 based systems, it might be because they trained with a Bishop at g7 on an empty board and they were invited to admire the dark square control.

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:33 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Joshua Gibbs wrote: I think a 150 player understands most basic chess concepts and can play well enough in OTB situations to pass on knowledge.
At the lower levels I suspect it's more a question of teaching how to play a legal game of chess and avoiding creative nonsense such as opening 1. h4 and 2. Rh3 . Basic checkmates as well. Beyond that, perhaps imparting the wisdom that trying for four move checkmates with e4, Bc4 and Qh5 doesn't realy work but there's more to chess than the positions arising from 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 and similar.

You might hope dogmatic rubbish was avoided as well. I once saw a comment that was obsessed with not moving the same piece twice. Thus the very normal sequence in the Scotch of 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nxc6 was condemned because the Knight moved three times.

I've seen Russian inspired training material that started with an empty board. If you've ever wondered why players from the former Soviet Union had an excellent understanding of Kings Indian and other Bg7 based systems, it might be because they trained with a Bishop at g7 on an empty board and they were invited to admire the dark square control.
I agree with you on the dogmatic stuff :) thanks for the anecdote...
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:36 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Joshua Gibbs wrote:
I think a 150 player understands most basic chess concepts and can play well enough in OTB situations to pass on knowledge.
I think a U100 player can. A U65 player (and don't forget grades measure your performance against other players foremost, rather than giving a definite indication of playing strength) should be able to teach children how the pieces move and basic tactics and openings. I agree that the weaker the teacher is, the more likely it will be that their pupils will reach a standard where the teacher can't teach them anything else.
I disagree. My openings were sloppy because i listened to people who said "openings arent important"

It sickens me to think there will teachers with chess in school repeating this :/

I would never have had the pleasure of beating a ICCF GM in an online simul if I didnt know openings
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18164
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:46 am

Joshua Gibbs wrote: I disagree. My openings were sloppy because i listened to people who said "openings arent important"
They might be right. Playing good moves on the other hand is important. In a way openings are easy if you are prepared to do the research and not strive for totally original positions. Knowing the ideas employed by world champions and other seriously good players should give an advantage against those not or less familiar with the positions.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1719
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:27 am

Joshua Gibbs wrote: I disagree. My openings were sloppy because i listened to people who said "openings arent important"

It sickens me to think there will teachers with chess in school repeating this :/
But how many years ago was this? Do you know if the teacher was a `proper` player (ie did they play for a club) or were they just given the job of running a school chess club? I'm still not sure whether you are referring to chess being taught in schools generally or specifically the organisation Chess In Schools and Communities where tutors attend training courses and are given a curriculum to work to.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

User avatar
Joshua Gibbs
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by Joshua Gibbs » Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:30 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
But how many years ago was this? Do you know if the teacher was a `proper` player (ie did they play for a club) or were they just given the job of running a school chess club? I'm still not sure whether you are referring to chess being taught in schools generally or specifically the organisation Chess In Schools and Communities where tutors attend training courses and are given a curriculum to work to.
five when I learnt the game.

They played for a club and whererated 50 and 70 something... Ironically one of the Works for Chess in Schools.

I am referring to both really to be honest, but mainly any tax payer funded initiative.
Chess, translation, dealing with the police, programming and almost getting killed or arrested: http://honyakujoshua.blogspot.co.uk/

chrisbeckett
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by chrisbeckett » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:05 pm

I totally agree with Andrew that chess teachers in schools don't have to be particularly strong, it's much more important to be an effective communicator and get the basics across well - especially if you're dealing with pupils as young as 5. The fact someone has a grade at all would, in most cases, suggest to me they were well versed enough to teach young children what the pieces are and how they move.
Also, if we are talking about school chess clubs/lessons, I'd have thought opening knowledge wouldn't really come into it as opposed to general principles like not bringing your Queen out early and getting castled etc.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3945
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:11 pm

Openings are important, but they aren't urgent: the level at which improving your openings starts making a major difference to your results tends to be quite a high one.

John Upham
Posts: 4357
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Low graded players teaching chess

Post by John Upham » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:18 pm

Joshua Gibbs wrote: I think its disgusting as they misinform kids who are too young to discard the nonsense which comes out of their mouths.
You might like to consider who you are possibly misinforming with your little rant.

A mirror can be useful in these circumstances.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Post Reply