| Louis Blair 2005-04-13, 7:02 am |
| Neil Brennen wrote (10 Apr 2005
06:21:15 -0700):
quote:
> Chess is an adult activity; such scholastic
> tournaments promote chess as a child's
> game, to be set aside when they set aside
> childish things.
_
It may not help as much as we would like,
but I see no evidence that Scholastic
Chess decreases the probability of
someone playing chess as an adult.
_
Every scholastic organizer that I have
met has expressed the hope that kids
would continue their involvement in chess.
Kids will see chess as an adult activity
in movies, in TV shows, and even in
commercials. Visiting people's homes,
they will often see chess sets as part
of the decoration. (How often does one
see a monopoly set used as decoration?)
quote:
>From time to time, kids will probably
hear news of world championship events
or something like the Kasparov-Computer
match. At the bookstore, they will see
weighty tomes like Nunn's Chess Openings
or Lasker's Manual with that famous cover
picture of Lasker frowning down at the
chess board, and, of course, they will
be nowhere near the children's section
of the bookstore. The very terminology
of chess speaks of famous adult players
of the past - Alekhine, Philidor, Ruy
Lopez, ...
_
Kids are going to know about adult chess
and scholastic organizers could not suck
that knowledge out of kids' brains even
if they wanted to. Of course, scholastic
organizers have no reason to desire such
a brain drain. The typical emotion is
pride when a kid participates in an adult
event.
_
I think a kid is MORE LIKELY to go to a
local chess club after having a positive
scholastic chess experience. Maybe
not a lot more likely, but still MORE
likely.
|