Getting raked over the coals

Readers who are familiar with my Scholastic Chess column at ChessCafe know that I strive to present the many positive stories in the world of chess, at a time when there is a lot of the opposite. I interview interesting and high-achieving players, and try to offer material of interest to young aspiring chess players and their families.

My style is not confrontational or sensational. Undoubtedly, that would yield higher readership, but it's not me.

For the past week, I've enjoyed the opportunity to sit in on brief portions of the all-girls U.S. Chess School session held in St. Louis. I'm very impressed with what Greg Shahade has put together, providing top-level instruction to the nation's most promising young players, at no charge to the players. For this session, the primary instructor was GM Gregory Kaidanov, assisted by IM Shahade and WFM Elizabeth Vicary. These are three very talented and dedicated trainers, and I've been presenting portions of their impressive training in this Chess Examiner site.

I have to admit that I was a bit taken aback by commentary from Elizabeth Vicary, who took great exception to one article I wrote, about a young observer at the U.S. Chess School session, Jonathan Chiang. Part of what angered her were these words I wrote in that article:

With the caveat that time didn't allow this reporter to get to know all the participants, the player that may be the most intriguing isn't a girl at all.

He's nine-year-old Jonathan Chiang, brother of participant Sarah Chiang. Jonathan was one of the players at an earlier session of the U.S. Chess School and is a remarkable child.

She understandably took exception to my characterization of Jonathan as perhaps the most intriguing youngster there, instead of focusing on the girls who were there for the training session. She wrote an impassioned plea not to neglect the impressive accomplishments of these young ladies. Incidentally, Elizabeth clearly states her admiration for young Jonathan - her frustration is with me, not with him.

She asks, "Why not write about Abby Marshall, the first female to ever win the Denker? Isn't that more impressive than getting an answer wrong in 30 seconds?? Or write about Rochelle and Darrian, who gave an incredible number of correct, thoughtful, imaginative answers? Or write about thirteen year old Megan Lee, who won the Under 18 section of Girls Nationals and tied for first (with Abby) in the US Chess School blitz tournament?"
 

I must say that I have to yield to Elizabeth when it comes to evaluating young chess talent. She is far more qualified than I to make these judgments. But I do feel that a few responses are in order.

1. My commentary about Jonathan was in no manner meant to slight the girls at the chess school session in the least. I was thrilled to see the mature way in which they carried themselves and interacted with others, as well as being impressed with what they have accomplished over the board.
2. I specifically wrote the words, "With the caveat that time didn't allow this reporter to get to know all the participants" to make clear this very fact. I might well have been more impressed by any one of the girls, but for the brief time I was at the chess school sessions daily, there simply wasn't time to properly gauge each player's abilities and potential. Certainly, all three of the instructors had this information at hand, but I was a guest there and didn't want to intrude on their time. After the conclusion of the session, there would be time for these discussions. 
3. I suppose all of this could have been avoided had I characterized Jonathan as "an intriguing player" rather than perhaps the "most intriguing player." But I was and am impressed and intrigued by this nine-year-old boy who, it should not be forgotten, has achieved much himself. For example, he had an outstanding tournament at the 2008 World Youth Chess Championships, finishing 5th in his section.
4. Primarily, I think it is important to keep matters in perspective. Between my Scholastic Chess columns at ChessCafe and this new Chess Examiner site, I think readers will be hard-pressed to find more coverage of girls in chess nearly anywhere (Susan Polgar's website and Chess Life Online also provide excellent coverage). For example, at this site, readers will find 12 articles involving the current all-girls session of the U.S. Chess School. This is unrivaled anywhere. Elizabeth asked "why not write about Abby Marshall winning the Denker tournament?" There are 7 articles here about the Denker, and Abby's wonderful victory. I have another article listing the top ten female chess players in the U.S. and the top girls under age 21. Reviewing my ChessCafe Scholastic Chess articles just over the past 12 months, there is the following: In March 2009 I wrote about tournament preparation, asking ten prominent chess personalities their thoughts. Three were women. In the January 2009 column, I interviewed Abby Marshall and included one of her annotated games, and included a link to an online interview of her. In December 2008, my column included coverage of the 1st Mind Sports Games, and again featured Abby with one of her games. Then in November 2008 and October 2008, I had a two-part series titled "The Future of Scholastic Chess" in which I interviewed a total of 18 people. These included Elizabeth Vicary, Abby Marshall, Abby's father (Dr. Jeff Seiken), Dr. Alexey Root, GM Susan Polgar, and Alisa Melekhina. My September 2008 column included an interview with Tatev Abrahamyan and one of her annotated games.

I have no argument with Elizabeth, only respect for the wonderful things she has accomplished in chess. I am saddened that she is hurt by what I wrote, and also saddened that at least one of the girls at the session and her family were also pained. I look forward to Chess Life Online coverage of this U.S. Chess School session which will surely highlight portions that I was unable to observe. But I think it is fair to expect that my track record in publicizing all aspects of scholastic chess, including women in chess (as partially described above) makes clear my respect and admiration for what all youngsters have accomplished in chess, both male and female.

Update:  Elizabeth mentioned that in the example I gave of Jonathan solving the chess problem posed by Greg Shahade, Jonathan actually did not come up with the full correct solution. They were both discussing moves very rapidly, and it appeared to me that Jonathan found the correct move at the end. However, in a recent discussion I had with Greg Shahade, he also thought that it was Elizabeth, not Jonathan, who came up with the correct solution. I stand corrected. Still feel he's an intriguing kid, though! :)