I would like to make an appeal to all of you parents and teachers of chess prodigies that decide it’s a good idea to thrust their seven-year-olds into the rigorous world of open chess competition. Take some reflection of the affect it has on them. I understand that your child has a gift. That comes naturally. But what seems to be lacking in most is a clear understanding of tournament rules and of ‘chess etiquette’. That comes through coaching.
Not to get into specific detail, besides adjusting his pieces on my time (every move) and eating at the board dropping potato sticks on the board, (I know eating at the board has been addressed in other threads under distractions), what happened essentially in a turning point of the game that was in my favor, my higher rated opponent whispered “you are really good”. I asked “is that a resignation?” and he shook his head and whispered “yes”. I then started to pack up and his father approached me and claimed that his son didn’t understand and that he didn’t resign.
So we get the directors involved, resetting the position and clock and the whole ‘big scene’ and my opponent breaks down and starts to cry.
Now I’m the mean old man that made ‘the poor kid’ cry. Right? Great! Now I’m the distraction and other players are complaining about me!
I understand. It’s not about age, it’s the rating, stupid. If I don’t want to play children, then join a Seniors tournament. I get it. I’m sure I will never see any age limit restrictions imposed in any open tournament. If you have a rating, you can play. Fine. It’s all about the entrance fees. I get it.
But what I would like to see more of from these chess progeny is being taught how to behave during tough competition with adults. Don’t let them get into bad habits so early on. Like reaching in adjusting the pieces after they’ve stopped their clock. Or make sure they understand to announce ‘I adjust’ before reaching in during my time if the urge compels them to adjust their pieces. How about teaching them to place the piece properly in the square the first time and not having to adjust it each time? We’re not playing speed chess. You don’t need to fling the pieces on the square. How about feeding them a complete meal prior to the game instead of handing them the ‘finger foods’ that are so annoying to watch and listen to them eat. How about not slamming the clock with the piece and on and on and on…
But above all. Above all! Please, teach them that THERE IS NO CRYING IN CHESS!
In my opinion, the biggest problem in this story is that the father interfered in his son’s game. That’s a big no-no and I am surprised the TD didn’t address it.
Did the kid cry because of the losing position, or because of confusion after resetting the position, or because his father made him play out to checkmate?
Actually, a lot went wrong in this situation. The position looked like a checkmate but it wasn’t. Although he was going to lose a Rook for a Knight.
I guess the boy got upset because of all of the commotion (trying to reset the clocks, recreating the position etc.) that was occurring because of him and started crying. It didn’t seem that his father was making him play it out (the game went for over 80 moves with draw threepeat position)
The father was close by watching the whole game. I’ve just learned that his interference is a no-no. I’ll have to remember that for future incidents.
I know some chess parents can be as bad as ‘show business’ parents.
One of the things that the director asked was if there was a handshake. There was not a handshake. I thought he resigned. A handshake I’ve learned is crucial. The director did not solicit the players close by (although at this point I felt they were on the boy’s side) as witnesses.
I’ve played children that were very well trained and very well behaved. Others that clearly knew better but were a nuisance (maybe too much sugar) and those that clearly didn’t know any better (as in the case).
IMO seven-year-olds should get more experience in scholastic events before entering into opens.
No, handshakes are not crucial. IIRC, just about the only mention of handshakes in the rules is a warning to TD’s that a handshake can mean a lot of different things. The rules are somewhat vague about when a game definitively ends; so many TD’s have fallen back on the handshake as a “bright line” game-is-irrevocably-over event. But this is not really in the rules at all.
A handshake could also mean that both players thought the game was over. One player thought it was a draw agreement, the other thought his opponent resigned.
In that case, the TD could rule that, since there was no meeting of the minds, the handshake was meaningless. Set the pieces back up (if necessary) and keep playing.
Many 7 yr olds are not preprly prepared for othe than schoalstic competition - and many are not well prepared for losing at that.
Parents mess up kids competitions far too often.
The parent had no rights heer and the TD had no business paying attention to the dad. If I were playing I would have asked that the fool dad be removed from the room as a distraction. Remember spectators have 0 rights here.
That is why I never allow parents in the room at scholastic events if I have the ability to make that decision. Many have no clue what is going on and want to talk amoungst themselves, which creates chaos. And those who do know something about what is going on often want to intervene on behalf of their kids, which they have no right to do.
I have seen kids as young as 5 properly handle themselves at adult tournaments, including keeping score. Personally, I think that 5 or even 7 is too young, but we’re usually talking about kids with 1200+ ratings and strong tactics. A regular K-1 or K-3 section is most likely way too weak.
Anyways, behavior training comes down to the parent and coach. The kid needs to know that, once the game starts, s/he is on her/his own. Likewise, the parent should watch from a distance and never interfere with the game.
This particular game was over once the boy shook his head and whispered “yes”. When the father insisted his son did not understand, that should have been corroborating evidence to the TD that a resignation did, in fact, occur. The TD should have declared the game over, asked the players to shake hands and warned the father not to interfere in the future.
I am sure the kid would not have cried if this game had ended as such. Shame on the adults.
The title of this thread, along with a couple of the details, is uncannily reflective of a situation that TDs and players in the greater Chicago area are becoming more and more familiar with. We’ve got our own pair of tear-prone prodigies with an overbearing, meddling dad. It’s hard to say how much of the crying is a product of simple immaturity, how much is learned manipulation and how much is fear of the parent (and, to be fair to the kids, it’s much more developmentally appropriate for a primary-age child to be crying than it is for him or her to be rated 1900+). What’s unambiguous is that both players and TDs grimace a little when they see that these kids are in a tournament, because in just six months, they and their father have established a noteworthy track record of drama at the board, and everyone asks himself what’s going to happen this time.
Yes I agree, I have played children that were perfect gentlemen and ladies across the board. Usually though they were older than seven. Most of the time, however, I find them with some idiosyncratic behavior that distracts me. Perhaps based on most unpleasant experiences I’m already predisposed to expect problems as I see my very young opponent approaching the board. I don’t know.
I thought of pressing the resignation issue, but since there was ‘benefit of doubt’ it just wasn’t worth it. There already was ‘a scene’. It wasn’t going to matter for me in terms of prize money. Yet I now know that the parent should not meddle in the game. I will definately remember that advise.
A couple years ago I approached the parent of my very young opponent and tried in a constructive manner, explain the numerous distractions he exhibited while I was trying to concentrate on the game. His reply was, “Hey, c’mon, he’s only eight years old!”.
So I suppose we are just supposed to root for the underdog. His young age is his handicap regardless of his rating. If he plays a brilliant game of chess, I guess it’s OK if he can’t sit still, can’t keep proper notation, plays with the pieces with his pencil on your move, spills his food on the board etc. … after all, c’mon, he’s just a kid.
I have the feeling as I stated in my original post, most TD’s may grimace but that doesn’t stop them from accepting any entrance fees from parents that want to enter their ‘gifted’ children. Most TD’s that run these tournaments are lucky to break even.
I suppose if I don’t want to deal with playng youngsters, I can sign up with the seniors.
“Look around this room, sir. How many other 8-year-olds do you see? This isn’t a scholastic tournament, it’s an open. This is the environment by whose standards he needs to comport himself if he’s going to play here, wouldn’t you agree? If he’s not ready for that yet, I do hope you’ll bring him back in a couple of years, when he is ready.”
My opinion on children in open events is that if they’re going to play adults they need to act like adults in terms of playing and board etiquette. If the parents of the child are not tournament players themselves then they aren’t going to understand all the nuances of tournament play. However they can clue their child in general forms of etiquette such as making eye contact with the opponent, offering a firm handshake at the start and saying something along the lines of “Good luck, good game”, etc.
If the child has a coach then it’s the coach’s responsibility to make sure the player understands the rules, knows how to make and accept proper resignations, draw offers, handling the pieces, clock, dealing with disputes without mommy, daddy or coach intervening. Simple common sense should also be encouraged.
Clarifying a resignation eliminates a lot questions later. There have been times I’ve resigned by stopping the clock and offering my hand and saying “Good game.” Adult players understand I’m resigning, but I’ve had a number of young opponents ask me if I was resigning. I will answer “Yes I’m resigning” and tip the king. Sometimes it’s hard to cough up the words “I resign”, so a simple king tip conveys the same message.
I’ve played many kids who were a pleasure to play with because they acted like adults. In fact some kids act better then some adults I’ve encountered. Other kids have gotten on my nerves because they slam pieces, the clock, adjust on my move and do other distracting things during the course of the game. I’ve had to nicely ask kids not to slam the pieces when making moves.
As a teacher and coach I have often said something to the kid after the game, usually in front of the parent so that parent hears what I said and how I said it. I try to do it in such a manner that it will be instructive to the kid and give something for him to think about and perhaps mom or dad might have something worthwhile to add. On some occasions I’ve found the parent to be just as obnoxious as the kid, and then it’s like talking to a brick wall. I have played both a father and son in a few tournaments. The father was just as bad as the kid in terms of body language and piece slamming.
There are certain age concessions I will make such as the 7 year old kid who’s a bit hyper and walks away from the board or fidgets in his chair. Heck even I walk away from the board and also fidget in my chair. Crying is not cool, but emotions are not so easily controlled at the younger ages. I see a lot of crying in scholastic events. Not as much in open events. I will admit that at times this blasted game has made me cry. I just don’t make a scene and go sulk in my hotel room or the ladies room.
I must say this, I have directed over 900 tournaments since January of 2005, most of them had a majority
of kids playing, and have found the behavior you have described to be very, very rare. As to crying, it is
just as often I see an adult throw his pieces across the room, or behave in an incredibly immature way.
Chess should not be about age, but ability.
As far as opponents who refuse to resign go, I find that adults tend to be worse than the kids. The worst part is that adults use most or all of their clock in a nearly hopeless position, while the kids at least move at a reasonable pace. Note: I often see 1500-1700 players in round 1, but rarely anyone lower rated.
Don;t forget that it is a three cornered ring you are looking at here. There is the child, there is the parent, and there is the adult player.
Yes there are times, cases, and incidents when the child will act in an inappropriate manner. This can be at the board and also away from the board. As with anyone [child or adult] it is what they are taught, what they have learned, what they may think is acceptable behavior. I think I was at the event in Illinois that was previously mentioned. I have seen the figity kids, and it is not just kids that will eat at the board. The TD and/or organizer needs to make clear what standards are going to be enforced at a tournament. I remember playing in a number of tournaments where it was acceptable to quietly eat at the board. Up in Canadia at the Canadian Open in Toronto this year it was expressly forbidden to bring any food into the tournament room, yet I did see a few cases where this restriction was flaunted. Also, I remember an incident at a Chicago Open where as a TD I was on one side of a game & 2 rows over on ther other side I could hear a teenage Master whispering to his father. I shushed him, and in return got a dirty look as if how dare I shush him.
Parents are another problem entirely. I would be greatly surprised if given the option a child did not want their parent barred from the playing room. It is understandable that parents want to protect their children, and not just from abuse. The problem for the parent, and for some adult players is they are taking the game too seriously. Chess can be a sport, and it is a competition, but it is also a game. Nobody should EVER be afraid, ashamed, or disheartened for/from losing a game.
Finally, there is the adult player. They do need to remember that they are dealing with a child. That doesn’t mean giving into or ignoring their behavior. On the other hadn there is the question of how the adult deals with the child. I have seen finger pointing, heard swearing, and just general bad/rude behavior from the adult in general and towards the child. Is this really the impression the adult wants to give the child, or anyone for that matter? Or worse are they trying to drive the child away from chess?
There is no question that no matter what the age of the person there are going to be problem players. At least with a child there is the chance and opportunity to correct the behavior.
Why didn’t you as a player insist that the resignation was final? Did your opponent deny resigning or claim he didn’t understand? Did the director claim otherwise? Did you object to parental involvement? If not, why not?
A director who allows parents to get involved is looking for trouble. The parent in the above case was now given encouragement to get involved next time. The victim of the parental involvement will not be the director that allowed it. It will be the next director. I can hear that director being told “but another director allowed me to get involved so you must be wrong”.
There is another problem with some parents. I have encountered parents who think their child can do no wrong. This leads the child to lie and/or cheat and tell their parent a different story which the parent will believe.
The first thing any competent TD would note is that the boy never said or otherwise indicated that he was resigning. He didn’t:
tip over his king
pause the clock
shake hands
say “I resign”
And the last point is particularly important. The whole thing began when chkirck suspected that the boy wanted to resign but, because he was only 7, didn’t know the proper way to express this. So chkirck responded to the boy’s statement “you are really good” (which could mean nothing more than “that was a really good move”) by asking “is that a resignation?” The boy didn’t respond by saying “yes, I resign” but simply “yes” (I’m guessing that chkirck meant to say that the boy nodded his head as he said this rather than shaking it?).
So the problem a competent TD has to consider (and this would be true even if it were an adult player) is whether the boy heard chkirck’s question correctly. There’s no way we can know what “yes” meant unless we know what the boy thought chkirck had asked. Unfortunately, the situation was further complicated by the fact that the boy’s father improperly intervened, so that there is no way we can know for sure whether the boy would have protested on his own.
A few years ago I played against a junior who offered a draw while he was on move. He appeared to be waiting for a response, and rather than take advantage of that I said, “I’ll think about it”. He still appeared to be waiting patiently instead of searching for a move, so I told him that I would wait for his move. After he moved I decided to press for a win. He was obviously unfamiliar with the draw offer procedure and would likely not understand that I was done considering his offer, but speaking again might be disruptive to the neighboring players. I chose to say, “I decline the draw offer” as I made my move. He responded with, “huh?”. I thought that he didn’t hear me so I repeated myself, which was met by “what?”. The word “decline” may have been new to his vocabulary. At this point another junior at a neighboring table stepped in and translated. I went on to win. We played again several months later and this time he made a draw offer correctly, and I was able to decline simply by moving. He held the draw.
Another junior was playing out a lost position until mate. He told me, “you don’t have to keep score” as he appeared to be annoyed that I was taking so long to record and play such easy moves. I followed the rule and continued keeping score, and avoided voicing an easy come-back.
The parent clearly had no standing. However, if I’m playing a 7 year old and he says “you’re really good,” my reponse would be “thank you” not “is that a resignation?”
This is true, but the only time I’ve praised my opponent’s play was after the game was over. Again the key here is understanding the word ‘resignation’. If I asked, “Does that mean you resign?” then it probably would have been more clear to him. (I didn’t understand a lot of multi-syllabic words when I was seven). The point is because of his age, I gave him the benefit of doubt and we continued play.
