3 ms·

At a state level or above, distinction in any age category is a distinction. I think I was about 11 when I learned the game, and before long with no particular

At a state level or above, distinction in any age category is a distinction. I think I was about 11 when I learned the game, and before long with no particular study I could beat most of my neighborhood peer group and some adults. Then I actually went to my local middle school competition, was handed a series of decisive defeats, and learned there's a world of people who begin to make a serious study of it in childhood, same as there are serious students and even prodigies when it comes to musical instruments, and in that arena, I was nowhere near the top of the local pool. Let alone a New York pool, where I suspect there are 8 year olds that could give many HN participants a run for their money.

mbrameld 8y ago
> At a state level or above, distinction in any age category is a distinction. But to the casual reader who isn't familiar with age brackets in chess tournaments, the implication is that the 8-year-old was competing in a singular competition open to everyone and won. So while it is very impressive that this 8-year-old won the state championship in his age bracket, it is far less impressive than if he had competed against all ages and won. Sometimes clarification is just that. Nobody is taking anything away from the kid's accomplishments by pointing out that it was an age-bracketed competition unless you're hoping people are mislead into believing the kid did more than he did.
- lazyasciiart 8y ago
  The casual reader could always read the article, which is pretty explicit about the age bracket. This clarification is only needed for people who want to jump in and discuss the headline, and they don't need encouragement.