What a lucky bunch of kids to have people like you all as coaches/advisors. During my time we had nothing. Even the teacher advisor of the club didnt suggest anything to do, what openings to play, which areas to work more on individually etc.  Neither was he a great player himself, constantly losing to the school's best players. Even I had taken a few points off him when I was a 3rd team player.

Training sessions for us were staying back in school & playing against each other. On Fridays a few of us wld go to the local chess club & play with other people. No games were recorded or analysed. Just play, play & play; so average players like meself never learnt anything abt analysing own games & neither were most of the best school players willing to explain or point out any mistakes to us weaker ones.

The best players in school were all self made & non coached. Probably they studied chess all the time at the expense of their formal studies cos none of them did well enough to progress to tertiary level. education.

Sandman wrote on 05/27/07 at 22:57:56:


With "Chess Club," the main group, we have 5-10 mini-lessons before play.  With "Chess Team," the select group (which also attends Chess Club -- actually, attendance at Chess Club is mandatory for Team members) this may extend to 20-30 minutes, or 15 minutes at each end of the meeting.  The main instructional vehicle is the demo board.

I don't have a set program at all, nor do I necessarily teach the same points every year.  Well, I do always teach how to mate with K+Q vs K and how with K+R vs K.  I work with kids who span a wide spectrum of age and ability.  Many of the young ones don't really have a discernable game at first, but just put their pieces on ridiculous squares.  On the other hand I have to teach some pretty strong scholastic players.  So I tailor what I say to the given group.  With ignorant players you have to spend a lot of time emphasizing the importance of material, both holding onto it and winning it.   

I emphasize the importance of good bearing when playing chess; sit up, don't slouch, don't talk, hum or listen to music, and act like you're paying attention.  The hand never goes to the board before the move is decided, something that can't be emphasized often enough.  When it's not your turn to move, scan the board, note the activity of every piece, and entertain little fantasies about what various pieces could do.  When it is your turn, calculate.  Have your opponent's best reply in mind before you move.  This kind of stuff I will say even while games are in progress.

With everyone, I emphasize piece activity.  "When is an knight active?", "When is a bishop active?" and so forth, are points to which I am always teaching.  Once in a while subjects such as isolated pawns, backward pawns and the like come up, but chiefly in context of, "Where is a good square for this knight?"  I teach that a pawn is not really "active" before it reaches the 6th rank, but that its main use is to restrict the activity of the enemy pieces.  I do not teach about pawn structure much at all, except for very critical points such as a color weakness around one's king.

Some very basic things you have to make sure the better ones understand are what to do when you're ahead in material and what to do when you're behind; and likewise with space.  An amazing number of scholastic players will toss away a perfectly fine space and activity advantage by swapping down.  By the time they understand that sort of thing, you also have to start working on endings.

Very few points about chess do I teach in the abstract; I usually will teach in context of a game we're all looking at, or when talking to some player about his position.  But like I said before, we spend a lot more time playing than we do listening to the coach give advice about chess.  Experience is the best teacher.

One little point is that when you play a kid, give him your best game, try hard to win, and don't coach him until the game is over.  Correcting a kid's move is a good way to undermine his confidence.  Just beat him, then talk about it.  Set a good example with iron determination to win and with proper bearing.  When you're working with the demo board is a good time to model your own thinking for them, but you can to this to a limited exent when playing.  You can say, "Well, in this position I am going to try to use my more active pieces to attack your castled position," and the like.

Sandman wrote on 05/25/07 at 19:05:04:


My wife teaches, and my sons, now adults, went to school where I volunteer.  I assume you'll have sort of support/liason who is a teacher delegated to oversee the chess program.  You'll need to establish good rapport with this person.  I think if you tell the school what you have in mind, they'll follow your advice.   

I would just tell them that teaching the moves would be a big waste of your time, and you expect players to come already knowing that.  I routinely send kids back who come merely claiming to know the moves.  It's ridiculous to have to fool around with someone whose knights move in strange ways and whose king constantly walks into check.  You always have to do some of this, but it's wise to keep it to a minimum.  You'll lose the interest of the ones really keen on chess if you have to spend your time teaching some perfectly ignorant kid how a pawn capture is different from a pawn advance.

If a kid is interested in chess, he can easily learn the moves from another kid.  We do delegate specific kids as "teachers" to help certain other kids learn the moves outside of chess club.  The key word is "outside."

Quote:



I don't know. I'm sure it will probably be some mixture.  The Middle school called me this past Monday and asked if I'd be willing to setup and coach a chess team. My guess is ti will be whoever wants to sign up in the beginning, and may taper off afterwards.

Will the players be completely new to chess, or will they know how to move pieces etc, or what level of skill do you think they are at?