Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Donald Trump has a natural disadvantage when it comes to playing chess. Should there be separate chess tournaments for idiots just so they also have a chance to win?
I don't care about sports, or winners, but if you have arbitrary categorizations of participants, you'll have arbitrary "winners."
"Should there be separate chess tournaments for idiots just so they also have a chance to win?"
In fact, most USCF tournament players participate in *sections with rating limits*, not in the open section
(against, potentially, GMs). USCF tournaments routinely create these sections in order
to give mediocre or even weak players chances to win in their sections.
"Donald Trump has a *natural disadvantage* when it comes to playing chess."
Oh, really? Donald Trump disagrees (or disagreed). He once boasted that if he studied
chess for a year or two, then he would become a grandmaster. I don't believe that could
happen, but let's consider his supposed 'natural disadvantage'.
If nature's a matter of birth, Donald Trump was born with the extraordinary advantage of
being an extremely wealthy white male in the USA. (Almost all of chess's world champions
so far have been white men.) He could afford to hire the best chess trainers in the world.
If he wished, he would be able to train full-time in chess without worrying about money.
Now I have noticed some aspects of his personality (such as extremely deluded judgment)
that would make it harder for Donald Trump to excel as a chess player. One wonders to
what extent he could objectively assess an unfavorable position and respond accordingly.
But I would not be too surprised if, with enough training and assuming that he has average
natural talent, Donald Trump could become at least an average USCF tournament player.
And the biological differences between men and women are far from 'arbitrary'.