Sunbonnet Sue and the chess.com blogs
Submitted by
on Mon, 08/11/2008 at 3:54pm.
In 1987 I competed in the World Veteran Games in Melbourne. It was a wonderful experience and brought together athletes of all abilities, ranging from world champions to people who run like crabs. It's an experience akin to the Olympic Games for people could never have hoped to aspire to such heights.
Two of the people I met there were Bill Empey and Sunbonnet Sue.
Bill, at age 93, had won the 100m sprint at the two previous World Vets and could still run the course in 17 seconds. (If you think that's slow, go measure out a 100m course and see how long it takes you to cover the distance. You'll be surprised.) I congratulated him on his silver medal and said, “You didn't win it this year, Bill.” He grinned and said, “No, that young bloke from Taiwan can still get down in a crouch start and I couldn't catch him.” The 'young bloke' was a mere boy of 91.
Sunbonnet Sue, from America's south, (her nickname came from the sunbonnet she always wore in her races) was a child alongside Bill and his Taiwanese adversary. She was only 86 years old and was one of the most prolific competitors at the games. She seemed to run in everything. When it was her turn for the cross country an official at the hay bale barricade (he's at the right in the photograph) said she should run around them. Sue refused and insisted on going over the top. It wasn't an inspired leap—she had to climb over—but she made it.
As the games went on I became aware of an undercurrent of bitching from a minority of the elite competitors who felt that people like Sunbonnet Sue were detracting from the stature of the event. After all, these were 'World' games and as such should be more like 'veteran Olympics' at which only top athletes would be welcome.
Reading through the chess.com blogs it's obvious that we have a percentage of Sunbonnet Sues among the contributors as well as a number of more skillful bloggers—which is not necessarily the same thing as 'skillful chess players'—and so the quality, and even perhaps the value, of those blogs varies considerably.
The beauty of an enclosed blogosphere like ours, where we all share a common interest, is that anybody can submit a post which may, or may not, be accurate in either fact or analysis. It doesn't matter a whit! This is a forum where we can all make a contribution to the group as a whole.
Some people post chess topics, some write personal anecdotes, some submit games and analysis, some write about famous players, events or history. And almost all of it will be well-received by somebody.
Of course, there will be others who may be critical of some of the games and analysis posted.
Tough!
The fact that we play a game, enjoy it, and want to share it shouldn't be subject to criticism. If a beginner rated at 800 wins a game against somebody on 1100 they have a right to be pleased with themselves, and to share it. We wouldn't expect the game to be very accurate but that doesn't mean the player should be deprived of bragging rights.
I'm all too aware that I don't stack up very well against strong players, but even I have the occasional triumph. For that reason I don't often analyse and publish my own games. They're scarcely masterpieces.
So what to do with the errors and inaccuracies that creep into our blogs? Exactly the same thing you do with information you get anywhere else on the Internet: think about it, check it, and if it seems wrong, query it.
For myself I'll continue to read the blogs and enjoy the comments of people who may know more, or less, than myself, but who have offered their thoughts for us to read.
What do you think?