Proper Parental Conduct

At the tournament I am currently working, nameless because in no way is the tournament at fault, there have been parents who have not, in my opinion, acted properly. They have approached young kids after games and assailed them for infractions that at least in their minds were committed against their own kids, their opponents As a tournament director, and parent myself, I do view such behavior as totally unacceptable. In my mind, if parents have issues with their kids opponents these issues should be taken up with tournament directors. Verbally ripping into kids is not acceptable behavior. These are my thoughts, what are yours, and more importantly, how would you as tournament directors deal with such offending parents??
This is an issue which I have been told of by the “victims” parents two nights running now. So whatever thoughts you may have would be appreciated.

Rob Jones

I don’t know, the kid’s parents will probably find out about it and take care of the situation themselves. Not sure it would be our duty to chastise other’s behavior outside the playing hall.

As a chess teacher, I have found it necessary to teach not only the kids but also the parents what is acceptable behavior at a tournament. I give them a sheet on chess etiquette. The parents are informed that only their child can bring up game issues with the tournament director. Their rights as spectators are minimal. If they have any questions, they can ask. But they are not part of the game. Generally, I prefer and enforce not having parents in the tournament room watching the games. Too much pressure on the kids when mom or dad are watching. Most everyone understands and conducts themselves accordingly.

If I am an organizer and see the type of behavior that the OP suggested, I would have a talk with the offending parent and explain their role, or lack of it, in any game. If they do not like it, they can leave with their child. It is never proper for an adult to assail a child, even their own, after a game. I have told parents who ripped their own child about a loss that they are wrong and that this behavior will not go on at our events. This Little League/Youth Soccer mentality of putting such pressure and criticism on top of the kids inhibits their development not only in sports and other competitions but in general. Children who have to suffer through a parent’s bad behavior often develop academic problems. Usually after such a talk with a parent, they are apologetic and change their outlook. However, some parents are unreachable. They and their children need to find another outlet and not spoil the competition for the rest. Definitely, the last thing I want to see is parents screaming at each other. It needs to be nipped in the bud early.

Does your sheet include the proper way to offer a draw? i.e. do not initiate a handshake; instead, make your move, offer the draw verbally, press the clock, and then shut up?

Bill Smythe

I would be taking issue those parents, calling in the coach of the team with them (if there is one), and explaining proper procedure, and telling them not to approach players in that way again. IF they persisted I would politely ask them to take their kid and leave. If they still persisted I would call security

Why isn’t it assault the FIRST time?

Alex Relyea

I agree with Allen. I have had to deal with adults before that acted poorly after a Chess game. It is not pleasant for anyone, including the TD.

It is the responsibility of the TD to have the atmosphere at a tournament be calm and in no way demeaning to anyone, children and adults.

It seems strange that it is necessary sometimes in opening remarks to ask parents to behave.

Rob

It doesn’t seem strange to me. Sad, for sure. I’ve dealt with too many over the years. The thing about saying it at the beginning means they have already had their warning.

I guess that depends on what they said and did.

from our old friend Wikipedia
In common law, assault is harmful or offensive contact with a person. An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm.

So it could be such.

Then again I’ve seen adults at National Scholastic tournaments…

well they were old enough to be adults.

Parent at a Texas Scholastic Championship at a Kindergarten - First Grade State Championship about a half dozen years ago when it became known that their son playing in this section and winning the first 4 of 7 rounds, was found out to be in second grade:
A. We had no idea what K-1 stood for
B. At this point, it would be unfair to my son, an innocent victim to move him to another section

The mindset of parents sometimes is befuddling.

Rob Jones

I can’t judge your particular situation as I wasn’t there. As a general observation, I have found apparently “sympathetic” parents of “innocent victims” to be capable of the most bald-faced lies. Unless you have trustworthy witnesses known personally to you,
these situations can be a dark swamp.

I appreciate your efforts on behalf of our Great Game.

“We had no idea what K-1 stood for”

Not specifically related to your tournament or this situation but…

I know it’s scholastic tradition but naming sections as K-1, K-4, K-6, K-8, and K-12 is really confusing to first time parents and coaches. “Why are all the Kindergartners playing the High School kids?” “There are 8 sections for the Kindergarteners! Which one does my kid play in?”

For a year or two as chief TD of the Cal Chess Scholastics, I got the sections named rationally (K-1, 2-3, 4-6, etc). Big reduction in first round confusion.

It probably reverted back as soon as I left. Tradition is a stubborn mule.

“The mindset of parents sometimes is befuddling.”

Yes, but at least they think they are protecting or promoting their own DNA. The mindset of the coaches is the one that confuses me.

In our area we use K-3 and K-5 because some schools don’t have enough kids for a 4-5 team. Opening up the section to K-3 also lets them be competitive. Meanwhile the bigger schools can send kids to both sections. In that case, there is a clear purpose and only one alternate section, so we have had no problems with confusion.

One problem with going K-1, 2-3, 4-6, etc. is when you allow player to play up a grade. Then when a state all-grade comes some parents want to have their (generally stronger) kids also playing up even when the sections are grade specific. If they successfully do so in that state all-grade in spite of all the rules against it, they may be very unpleasantly surprised when that tournament is used as evidence to get them ejected from a section in the middle of a national scholastic (such evidence has been used, though I think it is probable that the players were playing in the correct grade at their state all-grade).
Having K-1, K-3, K-6, etc. avoids having those tournaments cited as proof that a player is at least grade 2, 4, etc. when a player really is in a lower grade and playing up. As far as I know, only the state all-grades have been successfully cited as such proof, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to hear that there have been a number of times parents and possibly even kids have been berated for having a kid in the national K-1 even though they were obviously too old because they played in the state 2-3.

I don’t know why. They are protecting their own pocketbook.

Alex Relyea