Thursday, July 1, 2010

Ego vs results based decisions 2

Part 1.

Observe carefully, one is based on reality, the other based on delusion. Go back and read the comments on this blog and see if you can spot the ones that come from ego and the ones that are looking for results.

Hint: The ones that want results offer some suggestions to improve.

When we want results, we try to deeply understand the problem. We test out little models. We ask questions, not form hasty conclusions. With sufficient facts, we make evaluations and finally decisions towards the desired outcome.

So lets look at this problem. We know that it costs money to go overseas to play in competitions. And we know that many cannot afford it. And a few deserving cases are in need of sponsorship.

One possible solution is to allow more players to go to International competitions; those that can afford it. Use say the Singapore's model and allow all those who achieve more than 50% in select tournaments to represent the Country. After all they are paying and not MCF.

You then select certain International tournaments that have a higher chance of medals and encourage them to go there. You can even prepare them by having them go for paid training. After all these are people who can afford it.

With the medals come the sponsors. When there are a few good sponsors, you say to them, hey look, there's this one kid. The family doesnt have much money. But if you sponsor him/her then you can get milleage out of it etc. etc.

Things work in process, one step at a time. Thats just how things work.

I said earlier that ego acts in defence against admitting failure. Ergo Fear. Now you want everything at once. You want money without giving value.

Ego also doesnt want to understand and ego makes knee jerk self serving statements, actions. When ego is involved a simple thing can become very very complicated. Have you any personal experience?

So we dont have a problem that requires rocket science to solve, we have a problem that requires the leaders to manage thier fears and reduce their egos enough to get to a solution.

9 comments:

  1. "Use say the Singapore's model and allow all those who achieve more than 50% in select tournaments to represent the Country. After all they are paying and not MCF."

    Ray,

    I guess u didn't even know the real reason behind this criteria?! Is it a criteria with noble intention or !?

    May be can find out more from John of Singapore.

    From,
    One of the anon's writer

    ReplyDelete
  2. Its amazing why we must base our decisions on what to do by not following what Singapore does. We cannot support Asean because Ignatius makes money....

    Hey, if they have a good idea why not use it. Any idea can be used and adapted to meet our needs.

    Havent you learnt that from chess?

    We have a problem that 10 million plus plus and 40 years couldn't fix. Lets just focus on us and our needs. Why worry about others?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did u come across ur mind why other U-10 trainees fail to understand the GM or Jax? They r simply too weak in chess knowledge with rating between 975 and 1170. Yet they can get no less than 60% score in Nat Age Group, and finished at top 4. Btw, one of them actually only got 43% score during Nat Age-Group to be placed at 10th.

    Imagine what happen if many others with 50% score (those outside top 4] want to represent Malaysia. Poor little child might just give up chess after 1 oversea stint.

    May be, MCF should put an additonal clause that those with Rating below 1300 nat rating cannot represent Malaysia for Under-08, below 1400 (Under-10), below 1500 (Under-12), and below 1600 (Under-14) and so on.

    Then, anyone who want to represent the country will work on developing their chess. This way, alot of unforseen issues that happen during training or event will be non-issue.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Its amazing why we must base our decisions on what to do by not following what Singapore does. We cannot support Asean because Ignatius makes money....."

    Again and again, u come up with this sort of assumption. Btw, I learn my chess very well and along the way has invented lot of Chess theories.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We need to be precise when we use words. The word "assumption" has been so distorted that no reasonable discussion can take place. The point is it doesnt matter whether the idea comes from the Russians, the Indians, the Chinese or even the Singaporeans. If it can work, use it. But do not use it without understanding. Apply it to your own individual needs.

    Also with regards to training young minds. It is the trainers that need to adapt to the needs of the players and not the other way around. It is just impossible for the child to learn otherwise. We are not there to educate the trainers but the player. Clearer now?

    But you made an assumption here. That the tournaments will damage them if they are weak. That is not true. It is unreasonable expectations and unrealistic goals that damage. Not the tournament itself.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "That the tournaments will damage them if they are weak. That is not true. It is unreasonable expectations and unrealistic goals that damage. Not the tournament itself. "

    This is exactly what I mean. Just did not explain in detail like u did.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you for the clarification. We are in agreement here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Also with regards to training young minds. It is the trainers that need to adapt to the needs of the players and not the other way around. It is just impossible for the child to learn otherwise. We are not there to educate the trainers but the player. Clearer now?
    "

    This is precisely the fact. That's why some trainers can keep producing results in the local scene. However, it will reach a point beyond the control of these trainers due to other major shareholders major influence in the support system. To many, chess is not everything afterall.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I absolutely agree here. Khairulnissa has a good system. She gets the parents to buy in and clarifying their expectations. I must admit that I was very impressed by that approach. Maybe I will write something on that in my next post.

    ReplyDelete