Pride and prejudice
By Prof. Oren Gross
I have amazing kids and am a very proud father. Today I have been even more proud than usual and at the same time extremely angry. What follows is a bit lengthy so please do bear with me.
My two boys—Malachi (7) and Aodhtan (11)—love playing chess. As a chess player myself I am, obviously, very pleased but at the same time make sure not to push them and let them develop at their own individual pace and interest.
This week the two boys have been attending a chess camp run by the School Chess Association in St. Louis Park, MN. They have really been enjoying it and have come back home and immediately asked to do their chess homework and play with me.
In the camp the kids are divided into groups (according to their chess skill) with purple being the beginners, then red, brown etc. Both boys are in the red group.
As part of the camp the kids play six tournament games. They advance to the next group if they score 4.5 points out of the 6 possible. That means that with 1 point awarded for a win, 0.5 for a draw and 0 for a loss, they can, at most, lose one game draw one and win four. If they lose two games they can only make 4 points. All kids want to advance. My kids are no exception.
On the very first day of camp I talked to both kids and told them that should they be paired to play each other (I foresaw little likelihood of that happening, but still…) they should draw the game. That is the brotherly thing to do. In fact, I told them that I would expect them to do so even if one of them needed a win to advance to the next group. Doing the right thing by your brother is immeasurably more important than a win on the board, advancing a group in a chess camp, or many other more important things in life.
Well, guess what. Today, in the fifth and penultimate round of the tournament, my two boys were paired to play each other. After four rounds each had 3 points (3 wins and one loss). Obviously a win in the fifth round would have meant that the victor would stand a great chance to advance to the next group.
This is where it gets interesting, annoying in the extreme and a source of great pride. Aodhtan and Malachi sat down and shook hands and agreed to a draw there and then. They went to the instructors to tell them of the score and record it but then, to their surprise an instructor that I will for now only identify as “E” told them that they had to play each other. Another supervisor—let’s call her “L”—took the boys aside and explained to them (remember, this is chess camp for kids) that “here we play to win, not to draw.” So much for education!
My kids, reluctantly, sat again to play. With the play going on, my youngest soon got a winning position against his older brother, forking his queen. What does the little sweet one do? Does he push his advantage home and score the full point? No. He extends his hand and offers his brother a draw.
The response of the “authorities”? “E” basically threatens the boys telling them that if they draw, that score (0.5 of a point) will not be taken into account for purposes of advancing to the next group which means that both would have 3/5 points as far as the advancement is concerned and, for all practical purposes, will be unable to advance even should they win tomorrow’s game.
Many kids would cower at this point. Not my boys. They stood their ground and insisted that they wish to draw their game. When they also asked to call me “L” refused their request.
Drawing among siblings at chess is not an unheard of, Gross-special, phenomenon. Not that one needs any precedents for something that is obviously the right thing to do…
Of 34 official recorded games played between the sisters Tatiana and Nadezhda Kosintseva all games have ended with a draw. The only exceptions are games played between the two when they had been paired in a knock-out style tournament when one of them had to win and the other lose. But apparently what is acceptable for two of the top 10 women in the world (currently Nadezhda is ranked 8th and Tatiana ranked 10th), is an offense for 7 and 11 year old brothers in a local chess camp.
Judith Polgar is the highest ranked female chess player in the world and is unanimously regarded as the strongest female chess player of all time. She is also one of a sisters’ trio, all chess Grandmasters (Susan is a former Women’s World Chess Champion and Sofia is a strong grandmaster). And guess what? In practically all of their official games until adulthood the sisters drew each other (in games usually lasting between 10 and 20 moves). The exceptions have been rapid games, exhibition games and the like, i.e., games that in the context of chess rating “do not matter.” But again, what is acceptable for the best female chess player of all time and two other grandmasters is not so for 7 and 11 year old brothers in a local chess camp.
I could go on and give more similar examples, but I think the case is clear. Aodhtan and Malachi behaved impeccably and did themselves proud. The two instructors mentioned above behaved in a manner that is unacceptable, especially when this is in the context of a kids’ chess tournament. We’ll deal with the kids’ tendency to draw each other when they battle for the world championship…
As things stand at this point, both Aodhtan and Malachi have 3.5 points out of 5 possible. If they win their last games tomorrow each would have 4.5 points and by all right and reason ought to advance to the brown group. Of course, they may lose or draw tomorrow (I certainly hope the instructors do not rig the matches so as to pair each kid with an exceptionally hard opponent with the hope that they both lose or at least not win). If they do get to 4.5 points but the stupid decision (no other words come to mind) not to take their draw into consideration for advancement purposes stands, I do not intend to let matters end with that.
In fact, regardless of the kids’ performance tomorrow the two instructors (I am not faulting all the others) should be held accountable to their behavior. As far as I am concerned they have no business instructing young children.
Also, regardless of the kids’ performance tomorrow I told them how proud I was of them both and how, as far as I am concerned, they are already in Brown. In fact, they are already in Gold. Contrary to Ms. “L” words, it is not just about winning. In fact it is not about winning at all. It is about having fun, learning, developing, and also, doing the right thing. But I guess she would not understand that. Truth be told, I do not care whether she does or does not. All I care about is the conduct of my kids. And on that score I could not have been more proud.
*******************************************************
Prof. Oren Gross
Irving Younger Professor of Law
Director, Institute for International Legal & Security Studies
University of Minnesota Law School
Chess is a competition. You have a right to your opinion. I don’t share it. When is “throwing a game” OK?
Were Soviet GMs justified in drawing with each other in the name of some aim other than playing their best chess?
I have no sympathy with Prof. Gross’ position whatsoever.
There is no honour in throwing a match – and offering a draw without any fight, or in a completely won position is tantamount to throwing a match.
It could be excused if they had met in the last round with four wins and a loss each – meaning a draw would qualify them for advancement – and I’m sure other scenarios could be constructed in which a short draw was possible; but this was not the case.
Such an action was unfair to the other participants in the tournament. Prof. Gross should be ashamed that he is teaching his kids to display such poor sportsmanship.
For them to agree to a draw if paired against each other is a brotherly thing to do, but I would teach my kids to be competitive, even against each other. That better prepares them for life in the real world.
****
An Update:
Today (Thu.) was the final round of the chess camp tournament. Unfortunately Malachi (the 7 year old) lost his final game and did not get to the needed 4.5 points. Thankfully he is taking it in the right spirit and is delighted that his older brother got a trophy (and a BIG one).
Aodhtan did win his final match, got to 4.5 points, finished 1st in the Red group and…was advanced to Brown. Reason prevailed (perhaps with a certain amount of gentle prodding)!
As I think both boys deserve trophies, I am going to order one especially for Malachi for good sportsmanship and doing the right thing.
Finally, many thanks to Susan for picking up the story and publishing it on her blog. It meant a lot to me. It meant even more to the kids. Enjoy Tromso!
I fully agree with Professor Gross. Brotherly love is more important. Kudos to the kids.
The Dad is right on. You should never fight against family.
Sportsmanship means giving your best every time, winning with grace and losing with dignity (to borrow a phrase). This is the first time I’ve seen “drawing by collusion” included in the definition.
It would be interesting to see a cross-table. It seems reasonably likely that the second-place finisher scored 4-2 – half a point behind, in part because he was not offered a draw when losing.
If so, I wonder how the second-place finisher in the Red group felt about the matter.
Shades of Curacao 1962!
While I am aware that it happens between siblings in top level chess as well, agreeing to draw a ‘relevant’ game in advance isn’t right. It simply isn’t fair to the competition.
Two siblings (both about 10 years old) I know had to play eachother in the final round of some youth tournament. One was leading the field by half a point. The other was fifth. In that final round, the lower placed brother managed to defeat the brother who was leading the tournament. As a result, they ended second and third. In my opinion, this is how it should be.
Having said that, the things the camp leaders said and did are definitely wrong. They shouldn’t say that to adults, let alone children..
Telling them they have to draw is absurd. It’s a game! Do they have to draw at every single thing they do at home? Every single game they ever play? One would hope not. Let them play – win some, lose some. Were the three Polgar sisters under orders to draw each other? No; I imagine they enjoyed the challenge of playing each other!
When I ran a USCF-rated chess club, I had Father-Sons (that’s plural for the children, in this case three) as regulars who played every week, 6-round (6-week) tournament after tournament.
Initially I talked it over with the father (an expert player) & told him [my idea … I believe within official TD guidelines–think the USCF rules indicated friends & family members who traveled to or entered same tournaments might properly request, in advance, to not be paired–so I’d known about the issue] I’d normally only pair family members if it was unavoidable, or prize chances of others were adversely ‘affected’ [not defined, I’ll admit] by not making an otherwise routine pairing among them. [In practice, ‘unavoidable’ could normally only occur in late rounds.]
The father was okay with that.
Because their ratings (& scoring) generally always followed their age ranking (elders stronger than youngers), there seldom was even a late round conflict. The youngers seldom entered late rounds with scores equal to their elders (phew, for me!).
However, my original concerns were: possibility of excess sibling rivalries, or damage to parent-child relationships, which might discourage from chess or unnecessarily hurt the feelings of emotionally developing youngers (you know what I mean).
I was mindful of the possibility of differing maturity levels of differing age siblings (amongst themselves as well as versus an adult, i.e. parent).
As the boys grew older (stronger too) the father eventually let me know it was okay to pair him with a child, or a child vs a sibling, and I quit rigorously following my avowed plan and/or never concerned myself with it again.
I trusted the father in this case, and properly so in my opinion (knew him & his children for years at the same club, where I also competed against all of them at various times, even before I became the TD).
The father knew when his children were ready to compete without crying or being devastated after a loss to a family member. He knew when the youngers were happy or keen for an opportunity to contest a rated game against a higher rated, challenging opponent, even if an older sibling or dad.
I could see the children’s maturities, week after week, so their readiness was certainly no surprise. I saw no need to ‘test’ their readiness in their early member days.
Continued:
I don’t like contrived handshakes (not against draws in general, per mutual accord; even if a stronger player or player with better position or even winning advantage offers it.
However, we all have our ‘not feeling well’ times in some games (especially the longer ones) where we wish to get home & recuperate; or where our confidence wanes for some unusual reason (or momentary chess blindness) & we are unsure of our ability to play out the position as well as it may offer.
The reason for making or accepting a draw offer is normally only in the mind of the affected actual player (and we normally can’t truly know that reason, much as we’d like to conjecture). I’d normally accept it at face value (without inquiring or conjecturing as to the reasons). Thus I’d tend to give benefit of the doubt to many/most handshakes, even if very early in a game or when holding a serious advantage. World champions (no less) take draws just to ensure they get to the next knockout round, without subjecting themselves to possible mistakes or blunders (no matter how unusual that might be). That’s part of acceptable match strategy, is it not?
And it is okay to draw to conserve energy for a final critical round, in my opinion, in many situations. That’s also tournament strategy, sometimes just as important as game & move strategy.
I understand Prof. Gross’s teaching his sons what he believes is right.
And his position on what’s best to do when siblings are paired.
There are admittedly many good lessons that families try to teach their children with regard to behavior toward each other–perhaps to avoid excessive sibling rivalries (and emotional hurts, etc) that may otherwise be fostered (even if they cannot be predicted, even if they cannot be prevented in all instances in life). To promote lifelong bonds & deep commitments to always help the other, even if you have to personally give up a bit of something to do it.
At the same time, I feel if the rules anticipate matches will truly be contested, then an early or inappropriate handshake (early or not) might not be best (at times) for 1) integrity of the game or tournament; 2) for other lessons that are also important in life such as always doing your best (even if you may lose).
I believe the sportsmanship lesson we all need to understand (it builds great character as well, often even between young siblings) is that we all experience losses at times, there’s normally always someone better (more skilled or talented) than we are, that lower skill or lower talent can nevertheless at times defeat greater skill or greater talent through perseverance & doing ones best, that losing isn’t so much a failure or intolerable result as it is an opportunity to learn from our mistakes, pick ourselves up and continue striving, that (yes, I agree) winning isn’t everything, that we can still admire & respect our opponent & his play when we lose (lose with dignity, win with grace, as one Polgar puts it), that we are no worse a person (than before, or than other persons) because we tried our best & lost.
Continued (final part 3 of 3):
The professor says winning isn’t everything (I believe he believes that, and wants his boys to believe it too).
But when he uses the words “unfortunately … lost his final game and didn’t get to the 4.5 points …” he accidentally bemoans the loss (in a way, obviously trying simultaneously to be kind and gentle about it, but trying also to be encouraging and supportive about learning & advancement as well).
This rings a tiny bit hollow, and at least slightly like “winning is everything” [of course I exaggerate somewhat] since those descriptive words (even if accurate) do not recognize or emphasize the concomitant character building & opportunity for real learning that indeed comes from striving & losing (upon doing our best).
Sometimes we need the lessons of obeying others, and others interpretation of rules, even if we disagree or don’t like those rules or interpretations.
Wouldn’t hurt [many or even most] children to try their best and lose (occasionally, at least) to each other. Part of learning to lose with dignity (or on other side, win with grace) under any circumstance.
Part of learning to be comfortable with life’s facts–that someone else may be better (at least for this game, for this moment), even if they are a sibling!
Part of learning that a mere chess game outcome (like many not so important things in the large picture in life), win loss or draw, doesn’t make a pair of siblings any less close in their family love & support.
Part of learning that pride isn’t everything. That it can ‘go before a fall’. That humility isn’t such a bad thing to learn (when we sometimes find ourselves in ‘untenable’ positions).
As to the Kostinseva sisters (probably haven’t spelled the name correctly) or others (Polgars, perhaps) who have in fact or seemingly always drawn the ‘important’ sibling matches–I was raised with the teaching phrase “two wrongs don’t make a right”.
I believe that because others have been permitted to do something (handshake without a ‘true’ contest, or interfering reason like illness or momentary chess blindness … isn’t that just another type of ‘blunder’) that may perhaps not be right or ideal, we shouldn’t always insist on our ‘rights’ to be able to do the same.
A TD or Teacher at a chess camp may make rules or rulings we disagree with.
Rather weakens an argument (and again I wish to acknowledge Prof. Gross makes some great points about family values!) to point fingers at those who may ‘get away with it’ in another situation (that these TDs or Teachers probably have no connection with) to claim we should ‘in all fairness’ be able to do as well.
That is another tiny point that also rings hollow for some reason (realize others may strongly disagree).
Bottom line–I have weirdly mixed feelings on this interesting topic (and mean absolutely no disrespect to Prof. Gross and his family values he’s trying to impart). I faced a slightly similar situation, during my own chess club TD experience, and had to try to tackle the perceived issues with tact & diplomacy (from my perspective), realizing all the while that reality & opinions of affected family members might not ever be the same as my own!
And I was just trying to run a local club where every member would feel welcome & valued and respected, no matter the age, or rating, or results or emotional maturity.
Learned some great things myself, to be sure–even when totally unexpected.
Extremely silly post by a supposed Prof (wonder what is expertise is in!).
It is one thing to quietly draw with siblings but quite another (and extremely irritating) to brazenly showcase that as some great honorable thing to do. He is literally making that a badge of honor and point of pride. If they don’t want to play each other, then why not one of them sit at home? (and give the slot to someone more deserving and hungry to play well).
And btw, as pleasing as it is to this site’s owner, one sister (Sofia) is not a GM.
I also find this discussion absolutely ridiculous. The whole point of getting children to play chess is to develop their critical thinking, their analytical abilities, etc. The only thing that should be demanded from these “chess camps” is that the kids try their best, and that they learn from their mistakes. If that is achieved, than everything else is a bonus.
The notion of “brotherly love” meaning a lazy draw makes no sense. Brotherly love would amount to playing to the best of our abilities, and remembering that it is just a game. The loser should accept the result with dignity, be happy for the sibling’s winning combination, and try to improve. The victor should win with grace, offer words of encouragement to the (younger) sibling, and there’s no reason why this should dampen anyone’s enthusiasm.