This is why I will NEVER again go to any chess event where they are also having " scholastic event(s) running at the same time. Too many children these days are simply intolerable and I will not put up with them. Its easy to blame parents for their failure to discipline their children but its hard to discipline children if you are fearful that the DCS will take your kids away when you do.... so, the result is many children these days arent as well mannered/behaved as any family pet..... its ridiculous.
Disrespectful chess children?
Sort:
Well for some reason there are to many overated kid players, now I wonder how that happens.
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
There are , they are called senior events. 
Well that explains why I sometimes beat 2000's and sometimes lose to 1600's or it could be the lack of sleep I am getting right now, it being 3 in the morning here. The funny part about all this is that I am playing an expert today at 11 am.
Also I think you are right reasonabledoubt, can you answer this question as well,
Why do kids play inconsistantly and implieling from your previous how do the play more inconsistantly more so then an adult. For some reason I really can not figure this one out
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
If you want the responsibilities of a child, you must accept the rights of a child too. That means no drinking, smoking, swearing, driving etc.
Deranged wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
If you want the responsibilities of a child, you must accept the rights of a child too. That means no drinking, smoking, swearing, driving etc.
HUH ?!
ReasonableDoubt wrote:
1. Lack of experience. This one is self-explanatory.
2. Lack of knowledge. What I mean is that old guys tend to know all the obscure/outdated openings (Ponziani, Center Game, Max Lange Attack, etc.) where kids might not know them and lose quickly due to lack of knowledge. The same applies for endings; I've seen kids rated over 2000 losing elementary draws in the endgame.
3. Tactical vision. Kids in general can see stuff that older people don't see as they think in different ways and haven't developed as much pattern recognition/discrimination against moves because of this or this or this. What I mean is that a kid might see some crazy backward move like Qf1!! winning a rook in some strange way where an adult wouldn't think to attack by retreating.
4. Just generally inconsistent play; more up/down. Kids tend to not be as good about winning/losing, and this heavily affects their play. Also, if they didn't eat well beforehand, didn't get enough sleep, or are distracted by something it'll affect their play. Another thing is that kids blunder far more than adults.
5. Predisposition to attack. A large majority of upsets by kids come from attacking positions. You'll see young players occasionally beat masters in openings like the Dragon, the Marshall Attack, or even the Cochrane or the Halloween gambits. Kids tend to be imaginative attackers, and this makes up for lack of knowledge of theory.
6. Less established ratings. This one is also self-explanatory; you expect someone who has only played a hundred or two hundred rated games to be less consistent than someone who has been playing weekly for 30 years.
7. More coaching in general. Adults tend to not be coached, as they're pretty much established where as higher level kids almost always have coaches. These coaches can give them good or bad advice, leading them to do things they wouldn't normally do which affects their play. What I mean is that a kid might have a strange prepared line that they wouldn't have, or they might play poorly because of an irrational fear of doubled pawns because of what they have just been told.
Thanks for the answer, I really need to fix the bad habit of staying up late on the days that I am in a large tournament
Reb wrote:
Deranged wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
If you want the responsibilities of a child, you must accept the rights of a child too. That means no drinking, smoking, swearing, driving etc.
HUH ?!
I really do not get that one either, why would you need to give up all those rights just to have a seniors tourney?
Deranged wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
If you want the responsibilities of a child, you must accept the rights of a child too. That means no drinking, smoking, swearing, driving etc.
This makes no sense on many different levels. Off the top of my head it's logically flawed in at least 3 ways but I don't feel like writing a huge post explaining in detail why it's border line insane 
Children and adults do not have the same "rights" and they also don't have the same " responsibilities " .
Deranged wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Why is chess geared towards children so much anyway? There are kids tournaments for kids, why can't there be adult tournament for adults... ie. no young people allowed.
Seriously. I'm pissed off at how I'm supposed to always be nice and respectful to children but they don't have to reciprocate.
If you want the responsibilities of a child, you must accept the rights of a child too. That means no drinking, smoking, swearing, driving etc.
How about:
1. Responsibilities and rights aren't related in this way.
2. The lists (politeness on one side with drinking, smoking, swearing and driving on the other) cannot be divided between responsibilities and rights as you suggest.
3. It's responsible for both children and adults to show basic respect. Or to put it another way the responsibilities of a child and the rights of a child vary from time to time and community to community.
There it was more concise than I thought.
ReasonableDoubt wrote:
1. Lack of experience. This one is self-explanatory.
2. Lack of knowledge. What I mean is that old guys tend to know all the obscure/outdated openings (Ponziani, Center Game, Max Lange Attack, etc.) where kids might not know them and lose quickly due to lack of knowledge. The same applies for endings; I've seen kids rated over 2000 losing elementary draws in the endgame.
3. Tactical vision. Kids in general can see stuff that older people don't see as they think in different ways and haven't developed as much pattern recognition/discrimination against moves because of this or this or this. What I mean is that a kid might see some crazy backward move like Qf1!! winning a rook in some strange way where an adult wouldn't think to attack by retreating.
4. Just generally inconsistent play; more up/down. Kids tend to not be as good about winning/losing, and this heavily affects their play. Also, if they didn't eat well beforehand, didn't get enough sleep, or are distracted by something it'll affect their play. Another thing is that kids blunder far more than adults.
5. Predisposition to attack. A large majority of upsets by kids come from attacking positions. You'll see young players occasionally beat masters in openings like the Dragon, the Marshall Attack, or even the Cochrane or the Halloween gambits. Kids tend to be imaginative attackers, and this makes up for lack of knowledge of theory.
6. Less established ratings. This one is also self-explanatory; you expect someone who has only played a hundred or two hundred rated games to be less consistent than someone who has been playing weekly for 30 years.
7. More coaching in general. Adults tend to not be coached, as they're pretty much established where as higher level kids almost always have coaches. These coaches can give them good or bad advice, leading them to do things they wouldn't normally do which affects their play. What I mean is that a kid might have a strange prepared line that they wouldn't have, or they might play poorly because of an irrational fear of doubled pawns because of what they have just been told.
Excellent list :)
May 22, 2011
0
#36
Reb wrote:
What about attention span ? Surely this also figures in....
yep. very very short imo.
Reb wrote:
What about attention span ? Surely this also figures in....
Good one.
May 22, 2011
0
#39
Guys... you just inforce the rules... period. My middle school chess team competes in 5 monthly tournaments that are run by Polk Scholastic Chess every year. It's one of the largest student tournaments in the country: almost 700 students from guppy division (K-1st) through high school (9th-12th). This year the Elementary division (4th -5th) alone had over 220 students competing every month... middle school, over 160.
My point.... that is a lot of kids playing chess and some are very rude. The army of TDs have there hands full but do a great job... any repeated rude behavior ... and the player is asked (escorted if needed) to report to the score table as a forfeit.
By the 2nd monthly tourny (Nov.) this message is understood... with few problems there after.
please god let this be the proper use of irony or I will really need to re-asses my ability to use litrature term
well atleast I got a funny response