| politikalhack@gmail.com 2005-04-13, 4:04 am |
| Magnus Carlsen is a kid, last time I checked. Granted, one who plays
almost exclusively in adult events.... The Soviets (who knew a little
something about creating a healthy chess culture) had frequent youth
tournaments....
My 10-year-old student did OK at Supernationals, slightly exceeded
expectations with 5.5/7.0. The average Class B player would certainly
be in the running for one of the top ten prizes in the K-5 section, but
it wouldn't be a cinch. I think one would have to be at least Class A
to have a reasonable chance of winning the section; and at least Expert
strength to have a reasonable expectation of winning the section. (If
a random adult 2100 were allowed to play in the K-5 section hors
concours, s/he might win about as often as Tiger wins the Masters, but
shouldn't be embarrassed to get shut out several years in a row,
either--the top kids are that good.)
Chess moves are objectively good or objectively bad: we should evaluate
them w/out prejudice. Sure, younger kids may be deficient in the
ability to form long-range plans, but random tactics are such a large
part of chess, and the youngsters are phenomenally alert tactically.
What frustrates me about scholastic chess--there seems to be a glass
ceiling restraining the top kids. Not enough adult tournaments? Not
enough training?
|