7/27/2010
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.
7/15/2010
I want to believe that kids becoming good at chess translates into them becoming more successful later in life.
The cover story [here] of the July/August Atlantic is “The End of Men” by Hanna Rosin. In the story, the author describes how in our changing world, girls are now clearly outperforming boys both at work and in school. Ms. Rosin believes that cultural and economic changes like more “non-factory” jobs benefit women more than men. [And I’d add that the 1972 Title IX law provided many girls for the first time the opportunity to play in team sports, which I'd argue up until then had given team-sports-playing boys a huge (and unfair!) advantage later in life when they were considered for management and leadership jobs.]
Ms. Rosin suggests that “it’s not at all clear that boys have become more dysfunctional—or have changed in any way. What’s clear is that schools, like the economy, now value the self-control, focus, and verbal aptitude that seem to come more easily to young girls." [It’s also now well understood that girls’ frontal lobes are fully developed many years ahead of boys’…]
So… the question I’m asking myself is, “Does working at your chess give you more self-control and focus?” There is some argument that not only abilities can be improved through deliberate practice, but also behaviors. This is a premise behind the design of the U.S. Marines boot camps, and of the KIPP charter schools. It is clear that chess players who work at their game improve their ability to focus at chess, and develop better self-control at chess. I hope but just don’t know if this in turn is transferable to greater self-control and greater focus at school and work. What do you think? And could this be made into a (peer-reviewable, reproducible) study? Please e-mail me at westmichiganchess@gmail.com. 5/6/2010
I thought about some of my favorite local teenage chessplayers while reading the excerpt below from neuropsychiatrist Richard Restak’s 2009 book Think Smart. [emphasis added]
Because of the internal reorganization that is taking place between the ages of 10 and 15, the adolescent brain is singularly adept at learning. Yet learning is made more difficult thanks to the immaturity of the frontal lobes. As a parent or teacher, it’s helpful to keep in mind that the adolescent’s failures in concentration, focus, motivation, and consistent effort result not from willfulness or laziness or God forbid, stupidity, but from poor integration of the frontal lobes.
Fortunately, parents, teachers and others can counteract these tendencies by helping teenagers take an active role in determining the structure and functioning of their brain.
If the adolescent is encouraged to concentrate on music, math, or sports, for instance, the brain will incorporate these activities in the form of neuronal circuits. If the teenager, in contrast, spends the day “hanging out” or mindlessly gossiping on a cell phone, the brain will fashion circuits for these activities as well. In essence, adolescents choose the brain cells and circuits that will survive on the basis of the activities they engage in.
3/31/2010
Tony Nichols and I played a two game match in Lansing last week. I won the first game in positional style, and Tony routed me in tactical fashion in the second game. This was a clear reversal of styles from our previous games. I've been following Tony's advice, and giving my endgames some much needed attention; Tony has been on a daily diet of tough tactics puzzles.
 Lake Effect Chess Gardening Editor Dave Sundeen hosted. Photo Credit: Le Tigre
You can find both games from the match here. 2/17/2010
ChessCafe.com just published my review of Zenon Franco's book: Counterattack!
Thanks to Matt Hassen, Mike Schulte, and James Sawaski for their invaluable and substantive review of my draft article. 2/14/2010
Stuck rating. Here's the rating chart for a talented fifteen year old chess player. For the last nine months, his rating has plateaued. Is it time for him to take up soccer?
In Seth Godin's best selling business book The Dip, he talks about the importance of knowing when to quit, and when to push through the inevitable dips that we encounter when we pursue anything that is worthwhile and challenging.
There are a lot of good reasons to quit chess--maybe the 15 year old above has decided to focus his efforts on soccer or music or math or writing... But quitting just because you've hit a plateau is quitting for the wrong reason.
When the going gets rough... I think this problem of wanting to give up when we stop improving comes from two sources:
-
The Natural Genius Myth says that the abilities of a Bobby Fischer or a Tiger Woods or a Jerry Rice or a Mozart were doled out at birth. The reality is that all of these highest performers worked very hard on very challenging tasks over a long period of time to build the skills that made them world-class performers. Books like Talent is Overrated and The Talent Code show that this deliberate practice is the biggest factor, not talent.
-
The Fixed Mindset Myth says that there are fixed limits to our ability, and hitting the plateau is how we know when we've reached our limit. Dr. Carol Dweck in her book Mindset argues for the importance of a growth mindset, where getting better is about effort and learning strategies. Fixed mindset people are often afraid to even try tough problems because doing so pushes them up against these defined--and defining--limits. Growth mindset people on the other hand see the brain as like a muscle, that "grows" with use. They see tough problems as challenges that help make them better.
The teenager whose rating chart is shown above is the now 19 year old Magnus Carlsen. Carlsen decided not to give up chess for soccer. Here's the updated rating chart for the world's #1 rated chess player.
2/1/2010
"Defense requires great courage and great self-control."
-- Emanuel Lasker, quoted in How to Play Chess Endgames
Here are two interesting positions that arose in a recent loss to Michael Dang that Grand Rapids Life Master Kevin Czuhai and I worked through together.
Catlin-Dang
Position after 23...Qxg7
Where should I drop my queen?
A question of style?! In this position, I played the reasonable 24 Qa5. Czuhai was adamant: "The king is over here," he said, not quietly, jerking his thumb at g8. "Kill the king!"
*********************************************************
Catlin-Dang
Position after 40...Re8-e2
I felt lost here. I lunged out in desperation with 41 g4?, and the game ended quickly in Black's favor. Czuhai pointed out that 41 Rc3! is much more tenacious. Frybka confirms that a draw should then have been the likely result.
In Muller and Pajeken's excellent How to Play Chess Endgames, the authors described my wounded mindset exactly:
"Normally [the defender] has to follow the path prescribed for him by his opponent and thus he often has to make forced moves and concessions. When a game follows this course it frequently leads, especially with young and inexperienced players, to a weakening of fighting spirit and concentration and thus errors are likely. It is no accident that in disadvantageous defensive positions that the most blunders are committed."
Here's the game:
12/5/2009
Over Thanksgiving, I got to sit down with Kevin Czuhai as he went through a number of his games.
It was of course a great opportunity for me to listen to a stronger player share his thoughts about games as they unfolded. I was amazed at Kevin's clarity of recall--he even described his opponents' facial expressions during games that were played in the early 80s.
What came through most loud and clear for me was Czuhai's uncompromising attitude. Czuhai's games embody the Nakamura claim that "There is no point of taking draws".
Across time. Czuhai showed me one of his rare draws--against Sammy Reshevsky in a simul. (Eric Fischvogt took down Reshevsky in that simul). The same Reshevsky that battled Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine.
Here are some of Kevin's games:
11/15/2009
I was telling my friend David Schock, the Grand Haven filmmaker (and non-chessplayer), about the new issue of Lake Effect Chess. “It’s mostly annotated games by local players,” I said. His eyes glazed a bit, making me realize that “annotated games” wasn’t a helpful description. I explained what an annotated game is, and David of course immediately got it. Then David surprised me with a very cool analogy. “It’s like those magazines filled with sheet music,” he said.
Exactly! It frustrates me that I can share out a fine chess game that I've seen--or on rare occasion helped create--only with other chess players. A magazine filled with sheet music must have similar restrictions in its audience appeal!
11/12/2009
In one of his game notes, Winning with the Stonewall Dutch co-author Simon Agdestein emphatically answers the question:
Q: At what point did you realize you were winning?
Agdestein: "Actually, one of the most stupid questions I get during games is 'How is it going?' How should I know? That depends on what I'm going to do on the next few moves, and if I should go around answering such silly questions I would definitely lose concentration and then probably the game as well. The moment you start thinking 'now I'm winning' or anything similar, it's time to pull yourself together and concentrate on the position."
"I often tell my students that good players are like monsters from horror movies. You can shoot them and stab them but they won't lie down and even after they are confirmed dead they keep coming after you. So never relax!"
|
|
|
|
|