why are grandmaster picky who they teach

There is nothing about asking for an age to assume he [the grandmaster] would rather teach children or would rather not teach children.

Cause he is a grandmaster of my state but yet he hasnt played any tournaments lately

TetsuoShima wrote:

how do you even know he was a grandmaster??

It's also whom the GM feels confortable teaching. I have a degree in music education myself. To be honest, I enjoyed teaching junior high school and high school age students more because I could teach them music theory, history, and the like. I didn't care for the elementary age students as much (especially 5-8 year olds) because it was more just "music is fun" stuff rather than detailed teaching.

It's the same reason some people become elementary school teachers, others teach high school, and some become college professors. It's completely the GM's prerogative to decide whom he does and does not want to teach.

And based on your original post which is difficult to read (not your fault if you cut and pasted it verbatim), you may be reading his message backwards - maybe he only wants to teach adults (more real interest in learning and a higher maturity level).  If he's "willing to teach children" it seems like he mostly teaches adults but will make an exception on occasion.

(I deleted my earlier post because it made more sense to place it here as a reply to this post instead.)

How is that true if many grandmasters from the st louis chess club lecture/teach there daily especially gm akobian. Gm ronin and gm alejandro perez they teach almost everytime there, so how does it deminish the gm reputation and quality if those gm's are able to play at the same time it shouldnt make him an exception.

woton wrote:

ScorpionPackAttack wrote:

...He also has a right to be picky about his students and they should teach who they want.  It personally doesn't make sense to me either since money is money...

If they accept too many students, the quality of their teaching goes down, their reputation is diminished, and the amount that they can charge decreases.  The more exclusive they are, the more they can charge.

I'm sure no one forces them to teach or lecture.  They do it by choice - they must love what they're doing and they have the time and resources to do so.  But that doesn't mean every titled player should be forced to take on any student.  Would you expect Magnus Carlson to stop preparing for the world championship to teach you?

Are you seriously asking that question a rehtorical question??? Obviously grandmaster magnus carlsen is different from those other grandmaster players and that grandmaster is not even a titled player none the less like i said he hasnt even played a tournament almost 3 years ago back in 2011.

klfay1 wrote:

returnofxpchesser wrote:

How is that true if many grandmasters from the st louis chess club lecture/teach there daily especially gm akobian. Gm ronin and gm alejandro perez they teach almost everytime there, so how does it deminish the gm reputation and quality if those gm's it shouldnt make him an exception.

woton wrote:

ScorpionPackAttack wrote:

...He also has a right to be picky about his students and they should teach who they want.  It personally doesn't make sense to me either since money is money...

If they accept too many students, the quality of their teaching goes down, their reputation is diminished, and the amount that they can charge decreases.  The more exclusive they are, the more they can charge.

I'm sure no one forces them to teach or lecture.  They do it by choice - they must love what they're doing and they have the time and resources to do so.  But that doesn't mean every titled player should be forced to take on any student.  Would you expect Magnus Carlson to stop preparing for the world championship to teach you?

@returnofxpchesser

Perhaps GM Ronin and GM Alejandro Perez do not have more students than they are capable of teaching.  The qualifier in my earlier statement was "If they accept too many students..."

In the business world (and teaching chess is a business), if you spread yourself too thin, you eventually pay the price.

So are you saying overexposure in the media such as youtube is comparable???

woton wrote:

@returnofxpchesser

Perhaps GM Ronin and GM Alejandro Perez do not have more students than they are capable of teaching.  The qualifier in my earlier statement was "If they accept too many students..."

In the business world (and teaching chess is a business), if you spread yourself too thin, you eventually pay the price.

@ OP:

If I were a GM, I would not want to teach you, no matter what your age. You're too high maintenance.

I already stated he's willing to teach children under 18 rarely adults

markgravitygood wrote:

returnofxpchesser wrote:

Still a grandmaster should teach for all ages not just children. Someone as an adult would be as productive if he was teaching a child. It does not make sense.

ponz111 wrote:

returnofxpchesser  A grandmaster would not want to teach anyone whose thinking process is that if someone asks an age that he must be a pedophile who teaches only children. Chess is not a good game for you.

Because teaching children chess can be a real pain in the ass. That's why.

What you mean????

rooperi wrote:

@ OP:

If I were a GM, I would not want to teach you, no matter what your age. You're too high maintenance.

@returnofxpchesser

Every businessman does what is necessary to maximize revenue.  There's more than one way to accomplish this.  It's up to the individual to decide the method that they will use.

Some chess coaches will teach groups at a lower rate per pupil.  Some will teach individually at a higher rate per pupil.  Others may use a combination of the two.  Some even get a contract with a local chess club to teach classes.

This thread shows that the grandmaster was correct in declining to accept you as a student. You do not look at things logically and you do not have an open mind.

As a licensed teacher, I will only teach children (under 18 years old) if I have spoken to their parents first. I can fully understand a chess coach refusing to teach someone who is not willing to divulge his age. 

Teaching chess is an implied contract between two people. It is freely entered into, or not, depending on both parties. A grandmaster is not compelled to take on a student he does not want. And if you are not willing to give basic information, it shows that there is a serious lack of trust. I wouldn't take on such a student either.

First of all their reputation is on the line. The last thing they need is some student claiming this GM is my coach and but  unwilling to make the effort and thus sucks. Second the relationship between coach and student is built on trust. GM's have personalities too and so does the student they need to jive a bit. Lastly they have to figure out if the parents are willing to pay and for how long. They might be looking for a long term prospect rather than a one year deal, it depends.

It's not good. You don not trust him on the first encounter. How can you both go on? There will be fights.

Your age maybe not as important as your trust.

I thought you were referring my default pic. I was gonna say "hey man just because im posing with my chess pieces doesnt mean i m like bobby fischer elegantly moves his chess pieces"

http://youtu.be/8S3lKm9gw3I

markgravitygood wrote:

High Maintenance:

"Requiring a lot of attention. When describing a person, high-maintenance usually means that the individual is emotionally needy or prone to over-dramatizing a situation to gain attention."

Hence, this thread. you ARE high maintenance.

That Grandmaster is not even a titled player?

I think that your sentence doesn´t make sense.

And another thing: 

1) If he wants to teach children, maybe he is looking for people that can show fast progress over the years (and a long term contract).

2) If he wants to teach 18+, maybe he just want more focused students.

Anyway, is his choice.

oh they just want to go the Susan Polgar or the Kasparov way, pick a rising player and then make them their student.

those guy you train best, no matter what happens you look good.