With a rating like mine (933), you play a lot of kids. This weekend, I found myself in a U1000 section at the Michigan Chess Festival.
I was concerned that I might be the only adult in the section. After spotting some others, who had had similar fears, I settled into play. The grownups were a small minority, but there were enough of us that we didn’t feel out of place. In the first round, thinking I had spotted a casual error on my young opponent’s part, I grabbed my queen without actually observing the board. That left me holding my queen in my hand when I realized that I had made a major blunder. I had to move my queen, and there was no way to avoid losing a rook for no compensation. He continued with solid play and won the game.
This left me in the 0-1 scoregroup of a U1000 section, which meant I was definitely playing against some kids. Sure enough, my opponent was a young lad of probably seven years. He played the opening well enough, and then moved his queen to G5, directly in front of my bishop. No secret plan. No protection, just a plain old hanging queen.
Now this left me with a bit of a dilemma. Here was this seven year old kid, who had just given away his queen. He hadn’t been tricked into it. There was no fork or pin involved. He just put it right where I could take it. Talk about a no win situation. If I make the right move, he might start crying.
I thought about asking him if he wanted to take the move back. I ultimately decided against it. I figured it was a rated game. We should play by the rules. He would be down 0-2, which would put him in with competition about his level. Or something.
Have other people found themselves in similar situations? Do you have opinions on what people should do? This isn’t the first time this has happened to me, and sometimes I have, in fact, allowed them to take back the moves. What do you think? I know that there is certainly no obligation to allow him to take back the move, but would you do it?
No obligation to allow him to take back the move? I’m not aware of anything that allows him to take back the move. By all means, don’t take the queen if that’s how you feel. As for me, I would take the queen. I played a sixth grader in a recent tournament. (I don’t think I had ever played someone below 15 or 16 before.) I won a pawn out of the opening against her and settled in for what looked like an easy win. She then outplayed me completely. During the endgame she was up a piece for a pawn, but the position required some technique. She had 10 minutes left on the clock and I was down to 12 seconds (with a 5 sec. delay). As I was forced to blitz, she decided to blitz, too, and I won. I told her afterwards that she played better and deserved to win. I’m sure my voice was a bit apologetic, but it never occurred to me to do anything other than try to win the game.
That was basically my conclusion as well. He had let go of the piece. The move was determined according to the rules. The rules don’t allow you to decide that we’ll just overlook them just this once. I’ve done it in the past, but I’ve directed some more tourneys since then, and recently got upgraded to Local TD, and take the rules a bit more seriously, and decided that it wasn’t really an option.
So, I decided to have no mercy and grab the queen. Sorry kid. Lessons learned and all that. If he really wasn’t emotionally mature enough to deal with it, then his mom shouldn’t have put him in the tournament.
I guess I was just wondering if people would think it was a significant problem if I had let him take it back. I know that taking the queen was perfectly ok. I also know that allowing a takeback would have been a rules violation. I could have made an illegal move, by picking up his queen and moving it back to where it started, then punching my clock. (Writing “black Qd8” on my scoresheet?) As long as he doesn’t object, and we go 10 moves, the move stands. But would the TD be obligated to step in? As a TD, I think I would overlook it, not stepping in to correct the illegal move.
Maybe the best solution would be to just study and practice so I don’t end up playing seven year olds, but that’s a lot of work.
We’re all wired differently. All play, no study, and no improvement sucks the life out of the game for me. I’m cheerful that I didn’t work harder at the game in earlier years. It leaves room for improvement despite diminishing cognitive skills.
As you are a certified TD, I would very strongly encourage you to review rule 11 (Illegal Positions). Please also review rule 21 (The Tournament Director), especially the itemized list of circumstances in which a TD intervenes in a game (rule 21D). Finally, pay particular attention to rule 11H1, noting that it is a variant. Because use of that variant is such common practice, may players (and TDs) believe it is the actual rule, not a variant.
No, no, no. You must take the Queen. When playing budding prodigies you must not give them any slack. Beat them early and often. That teaches them to respect you. Sooner or later they will soar above 2500 and they will publish a book of their games with a “Juvenilia” section in it. You do not want to have your game with the little rascal published showing how they won in spite of hanging a Queen. Because they lost early to you they are unlikely to publish any game against you fearing you will publish how poorly they played in their younger years. Do not fear that they will cry. It is good for them. They have to learn very fast that there are consequences for every action. There is no crying in chess. No take backs in a tournament game. Believe me, they will be the first to run to the TD if you tried to take back a move. They might even have memorized the appropriate section in the Rulebook.
Now as to your behavior when taking the Queen. You must not bang down the capturing piece. You must not smile maliciously or chortle with glee that you have nabbed the Queen. Be business-like about it and quietly make the capture just like any other normal move. Write your move down quickly and bury your head in your hands to think about your next move. Allow the wee one to get over his shock. Do not go about the room telling everyone how you won his Queen. Do go over the game with the opponent afterward as a learning tool for both of you. You may then end up with a good friend to root for some day when he or she is in a US Championship. That has been my experience.
In a rated game you cannot let him take back the move, but I don’t see how you are obligated to capture the piece. I probably would, every time (no mercy for the young who show no mercy when they gain 200 points a year and end up beating you). But if you are feeling especially generous then leave it for a move or two, so long as you feel you’ve got the game in hand anyway. Intentionally throwing a game, that’s another issue.
I agree with many here and when I do play some of the younger kids who are Masters, yet, I am fond of tell them, “If you give me a piece I will take it.”
If it is a practice game that is one thing, but when these kids play they tend to move to quickly and make these bad decisions. Giving them the move back does not help them learn and become better. And letting them beat you just because they are seven doesn’t make any practical sense at all.
My opinion is to take the queen and if they are interested, go over the game with them later.
On occasion, some empathy is not out of place. When I’ve hung a piece in a winning position and the opponent whispers “sorry” while taking it, I’ve appreciated the expression of condolence. But say that to a seven-year-old, and it sounds like taunting.
If the young player is not too upset, go over the entire game, and don’t dwell on the blunder (“it happens”).
One aspect that nobody has mentioned yet is that it’s better for the opponent (in the long run) if you neither allow nor encourage him to take back a move. He’ll end up being a stronger player for it. (Hmm, maybe that’s not what you want.)
Back in my days as a 1500 player, I once faced a young kid who was playing his first rated game. After 5 moves, I won a piece. Two moves later, I could choose to win a rook or checkmate him right away. I thought about it briefly, but there was no choice. At least he was mature about it, and he even marked up the 1 and 0 correctly (with my help).
The best I could do was offer to play another game, just for fun. I won, but he played much better in the second game. I think he won a game later in the tournament.
At that point in my life, I thought I would never lose to a 7 or 8 year old. Years later, I would need to swindle an endgame to beat one 7 year old (he’s now an IM) and have two defeats at the hands of 8 year olds (now a FM and NM). Don’t take anything for granted against kids!
There are some things that you can learn that aren’t so hard and can make you quite a bit better. Find a good chess camp and make a vacation of it. Also, just do tactics puzzles. the two things will get you up to 1200-1300.
Believe me, there have been kids that I truly enjoyed grinding into dust, but this one wasn’t one of them. He had really big eyes and just looked helpless.
But I took the queen anyway. It’s an unforgiving life on the chessboard, and you can’t even blame a bad die roll.
In my younger days, when snail mail prevailed, I dropped a note remarking on draws to Jim Burgess, who ran the Boston Globe column. He got a copy of one of my recent tournament draws and published it along with my comment. My older and stronger opponent was in a losing position. Jim called me because he really needed an explanation.
Julian Keilson had taken my Pawn with Rxf5, anticipating that I would recapture with my g6 Pawn, and he would play Qh3xf5 with prospects against my castled King. But instead of recapturing, I played Bd7, pinning his Rook to his Queen. I would next capture on f5 with my Pawn and when he recaptured with a piece, I would exchange my Bishop there and the juice would be gone from his attack. It was then discovered that my flag had fallen. We agreed on a draw after my Bd7: he gentlemanly proposed it.
I am almost exactly where you are, ratings-wise. It’s harder to get good at this as a middle-aged person.
You realize we could go up a class or two, and still be playing seven-year-olds, right? Better to simply get used to playing kids, and maybe pack some Kleenex in case your opponent bursts into tears.
I take it as a given that the kid across the board from me has the “quick brain” advantage. Against that, I have the ability to sit still for four hours, and perhaps make fewer mistakes. Yes, I would take the queen.
That teaches them to respect you. Sooner or later they will soar above 2500 and they will publish a book of their games with a “Juvenilia” section in it. You do not want to have your game with the little rascal published showing how they won in spite of hanging a Queen. Because they lost early to you they are unlikely to publish any game against you fearing you will publish how poorly they played in their younger years. Do not fear that they will cry. It is good for them. They have to learn very fast that there are consequences for every action. There is no crying in chess. No take backs in a tournament game. Believe me, they will be the first to run to the TD if you tried to take back a move. They might even have memorized the appropriate section in the Rulebook.