That’s the point. Relatives and/or coaches often pull shenanigans that make no sense.

As to Nip’s record, it means nothing to most people, and rightly so.

It’s only a country record (think of how far Russia is ahead in such youth precociosity internationally), and not a FIDE one at that either.

When I look at Nakamura’s tournament history, I wonder if he ever had to go to school, since he had so many matches on weeknights as a primary school kid.

Where do you draw the line between trying your best and trying too hard? Both of them, along with their support system of family, coaches, etc., made decisions that led to them having extraordinary success at chess. Is that unfair to kids that don’t live near good coaches, or can’t afford them, or don’t have tournaments in the area, or need to do their homework and play sports?

By the way, the Fabiano story surprises me, since his coach from that time doesn’t seem to care at all about rating points, and regularly says if the computers all broke down people would still play chess and figure out who was the best. At the time, I recall it was indeed all about the rating (relatives, coaches, doesn’t matter). Many kids are controlled like that. It’s absurd of course.

What I wonder is: why did Nicholas Nip stop playing, cold turkey, after he made Master? Is he burnt out? Was that his only goal? Do his parents now want him to conquer something else? I can’t find any answers. I saw the puppetmaster/trainer/rating planner cross-listed somewhere as a poker player. It increases suspicions.

MG Note: Nakamura also had to put up with rather silly “jealousy” notions. Elsewhere, NM Shankland posted a comment that the match opponents “were not morons.” These comments miss the point. The crux of the matter is what is, and isn’t, a legitimate route to make a record. Matches should not be allowed to establish youth records, because they are too easy to manipulate. Well-meaning or publicity seeking parents and coaches can really go the extra yard and get the kiddie record in record time, but at what cost? It all boils down to this simple idea, not an attack on personalities.

Has Shillers floor been lowered the way the rules say it should?

Jim T has an interesting point about the 100 point rule. Those “quads” were arranged matches, not quads that anyone could compete in.

Integrity would be nice.

3/29/08: MG Note: There is no there, there, when it comes to USCF ethics. I doubt anyone in power cares about these issues, all I see are congratulations – there is a tiny chance this discussion might lead to something.

My recollection is that while in the Virginia State Penitentiary, he became one of the highest-rated players in the state mostly thru “matches”.

USCF should do something about this. Also, Eric Schiller should have his floor dropped by 100 rating points according to match rules.

In terms of the playing a few rounds and dropping out, there’s another NY kid who does that. If he plays on Thursday night he’ll request a 1/2 point bye for the last round. I have no problem with that since the last round starts at 10:30 pm. Typically with the rating break he’ll lose to a 2300 in round 1. In round two he may beat a 1700-1800 rated player and then drop out. I’ve seen him do the same thing on the weekend one day events. I think it’s a stupid way to scrape up a few rating points. I think the only time I’ve seen him complete the entire schedule is when he’s wins an important scholastic event.

MG Note: Suggested new USCF rule: if a kid tries to drop out to gain a few rating points, he or she should be put in the public pillory for all to see during the missed round(s).

But I even see older established players monkeying around with well timed byes to avoid certain opponents. Just play the damn game, and beat the guys you gotta beat.

As far as withdrawing from events to protect rating gains, I don’t see the point unless the plan is to immediately retire from chess, as your rating will obviously be at risk the next time you play. Or if you can arrange it so that all your rated games are played with the White pieces.

MG Note: I think the point was to gain a point or two from early round fish then save the commute in for the second day and also avoid the “more dangerous opposition.” Pretty silly stuff for a player now rated about 2600 FIDE and one the offending relative was taken to task for at the time. The offending relative (O.R.) offered a frothy indignant defense of the frequent withdrawals, but that made young Fab look even worse. It’s hard to put a good face on playing just the first rounds in a 2 day 4-rounder. A long time ago IM Eugene Meyer gave me the sage advice: Just play all your rounds, no matter how you’re doing. And he’s right. That’s the way to play a chess tournament. Unless of course, the bubonic plague is involved.