I have seen the future of West Michigan chess, and her name is Clara.
“Without Bill Gates, Steve Jobs would surely not be the man he is today. If Karpov had not existed, you might not be talking to me today.” – Garry Kasparov in Harvard Business Review, April 2005.
In David Shenk’s The Genius in All of Us, he talks about the Greek concept of agonism. Agonism implies contest as process, rather than result. Shenk cites Nietzsche: “Every natural gift must develop itself by contests."
When I was a teenager playing chess in Pittsburgh, my main competition was a kid named Bob Carr. Bob Carr was stronger than me, but his mere existence spurred me on to be a better chess player than I would have otherwise been. Bob Carr’s older brother James was at first even stronger. What more powerful form of rivalry (and opportunity for agonism) than sibling rivalry? Which got me to thinking about the kids sitting on top of Mike Schulte’s West Michigan's Top Juniors list.
Question: What do #1 Michael Chen, #2 Will Brooks, and #8 Clara McGrew all have in common?
Answer: An older sibling who is also a very strong chess player.
In Michael’s case, Peter (#3); in Clara’s case, Bethel (#4), and in Will’s case, there’s his brother Michael, a former Vermont High School champion who is not on the list only because he is recently graduated. So I’d guess rivalry, especially sibling rivalry, can fuel the “rage to master” level of motivation that drives expert achievement.
Comments
Tim Clark wrote:
Made me wonder, do you think that the siblings have to face off "mano y mano" for this drive to be at its maximum, or is the mere status of having a sibling competing in the same activity just as powerful? I know from my experiences as a kid playing basketball against an older, much larger brother, I was frustrated at times but it motivated me to improve to rub it in his face. I did this with many activities with my brother until eventually I was better than him at many things and the remaining things he was better at I just had no interest in -wink-.
I'm fairly sure that Clara/Bethel, Michael/Peter, and Will/Michael don't compete OTB for reasons of tension in the household. I'm wondering if you think that they are missing out on an opportunity for healthy improvement by playing due to the natural rivalry or does the existence of a sibling doing the same activity provide enough "fuel"? Personally, I think that healthy, direct competitions are perfectly suitable but I suppose this is a new age.
Regarding your situation with Mr. Carr - I'm wondering if you think that relative age is a great motivator as well. Being around people about your age leads to more motivation than competing with someone older and better than you. I also think this must be an important factor because you can't play the "he just has tons more experience" card. I'm sure everyone is motivated to improve by competing with better people (so long as they are not constantly being beaten to a pulp for most people) but I think age is a very important factor for kids.