PDA

View Full Version : Australian Master Title



TrueBeliever
07-06-2009, 07:53 AM
With the passing of John Hanks another important figure in Australian Chess history has disappeared. John as we know was the inventor and the keeper of the Australian Master Title records and one wonders what has happened to them. The scheme now sadly abandoned by the ACF awarded the title to chess players of distinction via a set of complicated rules, the easiest one being that you would be pretty certain to get the title if you won the Australian Championship. I imagine therefore of the still active players Doug Hamilton [3 times titleholder] would be an Australian Master and so would Robert Jamieson [semi active] Hanks himself of course was an Australian Master and as he still appears on the latest ratings list has to be regarded as active.
Another possibility is Darryl Johansen, although the scheme may have been abandoned before Darryl won his first title

Bill Gletsos
07-06-2009, 08:55 AM
Hanks himself of course was an Australian Master and as he still appears on the latest ratings list has to be regarded as active.Since he does not appear on the latest active list he is definitely not regarded as active. In fact the last active list he was on was December 2005.

His last rated tournament was the Melbourne Club Championship from April 2004.

shan_siddiqi
07-06-2009, 12:50 PM
Do you think it might confound things if the "Australian Master" title was such a high distinction? I'd think that the FIDE titles (FM, IM, and GM) should probably remain as the most prestigious... otherwise, it'd lead to confusion.

For instance, in the US, the title of "National Master" is awarded to anybody who has a USCF rating of 2200 (USCF ratings are usually slightly higher than FIDE ratings). If you break 2400 or if you hold your 2200 rating for at least 300 games, then you're a "life master". So the National Master title is intended to be a step below the "international master" title... which makes sense, since "national" shouldn't be bigger than "international." Thoughts?

Denis_Jessop
07-06-2009, 01:05 PM
There is an article on the Australian Master Title by John Hanks in the book "Australian Chess Championaship 1974 - 100 Best Games" published by Chessmates of Australia. It includes a list of Australian Masters to then. That list includes both Doug Hamilton and Robert Jamieson. It is quite some time since the title was used as I have been on the ACF Council since 1997 and it was not then in use. Perhaps someone may remember when it was last used. Hanks had worked out titles for players back to the first Australian Championship or thereabouts so it could be possible, I imagine, to resurrect the title if the will were there.

DJ

TrueBeliever
07-06-2009, 03:33 PM
Since he does not appear on the latest active list he is definitely not regarded as active. In fact the last active list he was on was December 2005 from post #2

I imported John Hanks from the latest ACF SP master file naively supposing that that list was a list of active players. This is obviously not the case as the list also contains the late Eddie Malitis and the name of the late Norm Frean who was a friend of mine and has been dead for at least 20 years

Bill Gletsos
07-06-2009, 06:14 PM
I imported John Hanks from the latest ACF SP master file naively supposing that that list was a list of active players.It is called the SP master file, not the SP active file. :wall: :wall:

This is obviously not the case as the list also contains the late Eddie Malitis and the name of the late Norm Frean who was a friend of mine and has been dead for at least 20 yearsYes well if the State Ratings Officer is not advised that a person is deceased then it is little wonder they remain on the master file. :doh: :doh: :doh:

ElevatorEscapee
07-06-2009, 09:32 PM
Hi Bill,

General question, just because I am curious: if someone is noted as deceased, do they get removed from the ACF master file?

If so, are their ratings (at the time they passed away) recorded somewhere else (eg an 'all time ACF rating master file', or something like that)?

==============================

Sorry, I know we are drifting a bit off topic from the concept of "Australian Master" titles here... My only comment on that would be that it is a bit easier nowadays than it was in, say, the 1970s or earlier, for an Australian player to have the opportunity to compete for a master title, so maybe it isn't as important that such a title exist for players in this day and age.

However, I believe that those who have qualified for it, (if it was officially recognized), should be proud to add it to their existing titles. :)

Bill Gletsos
07-06-2009, 10:21 PM
Hi Bill,

General question, just because I am curious: if someone is noted as deceased, do they get removed from the ACF master file?Logically yes, physically no.

If so, are their ratings (at the time they passed away) recorded somewhere else (eg an 'all time ACF rating master file', or something like that)?No.

Spiny Norman
08-06-2009, 06:39 AM
Bill, is there an archive of all the previous ACF master files, or perhaps the last N years of files? If I were to ask for a copy of them, who should I ask?

TrueBeliever
08-06-2009, 12:16 PM
In post # 3 shan siddigi suggest that a FIDE master title might be more prestigious than the Australian Master title ever was. I would strongly suggest otherwise. There would be very few of today's FIDE masters capable of winning an Australian Championship whereas all those who were awarded the AM proved that they could. I think it was more when Hanks retired it became too hard to maintain, and FIDE titles were an easy option.

Tony Dowden
08-06-2009, 01:14 PM
In post # 3 shan siddigi suggest that a FIDE master title might be more prestigious than the Australian Master title ever was. I would strongly suggest otherwise. There would be very few of today's FIDE masters capable of winning an Australian Championship whereas all those who were awarded the AM proved that they could. I think it was more when Hanks retired it became too hard to maintain, and FIDE titles were an easy option.

And the NZ master title is arguably harder to win than the FM title. My reasoning is that most performances leading to large gains of master points (100 needed) would generally have to be over FIDE 2300.

In the case of Australia most decent performances would probably have to exceed FIDE 2400 - so I'm inclined to agree with True Believer.

Basil
08-06-2009, 01:19 PM
The previous two posts seem to make much sense. I'd be interested in hearing counter positions.

Metro
09-06-2009, 03:30 AM
Do you think it might confound things if the "Australian Master" title was such a high distinction? I'd think that the FIDE titles (FM, IM, and GM) should probably remain as the most prestigious... otherwise, it'd lead to confusion.

For instance, in the US, the title of "National Master" is awarded to anybody who has a USCF rating of 2200 (USCF ratings are usually slightly higher than FIDE ratings). If you break 2400 or if you hold your 2200 rating for at least 300 games, then you're a "life master". So the National Master title is intended to be a step below the "international master" title... which makes sense, since "national" shouldn't be bigger than "international." Thoughts?
I wonder what the title means to the recipients? I heard there was a National Master title in Rumania too but I don't know anything else about it.I guess if I won an Australian Championship:lol: I would be happy with the title" Australian Champion" and the trophy and record in the books.

TrueBeliever
09-06-2009, 06:48 AM
I wonder what the title means to the recipients? I heard there was a National Master title in Rumania too but I don't know anything else about it.I guess if I won an Australian Championship:lol: I would be happy with the title" Australian Champion" and the trophy and record in the books.
Met. if you were an Australian champion you'd be a former Australian champion after 2 years and would have to give the trophy back. If you were to become an Australian Master it would be for life.

Metro
10-06-2009, 05:42 AM
Met. if you were an Australian champion you'd be a former Australian champion after 2 years and would have to give the trophy back. Don't they have a trophy or medal to keep?The perpetual trophy is another.

If you were to become an Australian Master it would be for life.I see this.I make the point that I would be happy with the achievement of Australian champion.

MichaelBaron
10-06-2009, 11:34 AM
In post # 3 shan siddigi suggest that a FIDE master title might be more prestigious than the Australian Master title ever was. I would strongly suggest otherwise. There would be very few of today's FIDE masters capable of winning an Australian Championship whereas all those who were awarded the AM proved that they could. I think it was more when Hanks retired it became too hard to maintain, and FIDE titles were an easy option.

I agree with this posting for several reasons:

1) FM title is now useless - too many people got it via zonals so it no longer holds any value (previously it was an indication of someone playing 2300 fide)
2) Australian Master title was in use when there was no such title as FM..and becoming an IM at the time was extremely difficult (I believe Australia had 2 titled players only at the time!) The title inflation over the last 40 years has been obvious. Otherwise, someone like Hamilton could easily be an IM and someone like Jamieson could easily be a GM.
3) Today's Fide masters are not only incapable of winning Australian Championship - some of them are not even capable of qualifying for one (2100 ACF rating) :).

Kevin Bonham
10-06-2009, 01:21 PM
Does anyone have a copy of the exact regulations for the Australian Master title? It could be a useful comparative exercise to try running subsequent players through the system and determine how many subsequent players would probably have qualified.

There is previous discussion of the Australian Master title in the thread here (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=4306). Note that that starts out discussing a possible sub-(real)FM Australian Master title but then there is discussion of the original title, especially in posts 13, 32, 44, 46 and 47 (the last two of which I reproduce below):


Before I posted the post to which you responded I looked up my copies of "Chess World" and couldn't find anything. This was a case of peripheral Chess Blindness (Amaurosis Schacchistica - Tarrasch) as the 1959 volume contains 3 references, the last in the November issue being a comprehensive account of the establishment of the whole thing. It wasn't established until 1959 but, in the best ACF tradition, it had been recommended by a subcommittee in 1955 and had taken all that time to be put into force. The SC was Purdy and Steiner. The awards were back-dated to 1922 - the year of the foundation of the ACF. As I and Peter Parr have mentioned, John Hanks was appointed as recorder. The central feature of the system was that one was awarded points based on results in certain events. You became a candidate master (not of itself a title) on receiving 20 points and a master on achieving 100 points of which 45 had to have been gained in Australian Championships. Events were divided into 4 classes - A, B, C and D. Class A was the Australian championship. Class B basically interstate events with certain provisos. Class C all State Championships and events like class B ones but that didn't meet the provisos and Class D any other recognised tourney. All a bit vague! The calculation of points was a complicated business but is described in the article. It is rather hard from Purdy's article to work out who the initial masters were I think that all but Hanks are now dead. What happened after that I don't know and the ACF's records are so abysmal that ther is no chance of finding out from there. Incidentally, I don't think there was an ACF Bulletin at that time. There may be some information in NSWCA records/publications.

As regards the rationale of the title, Purdy and Steiner's Report said "It was considered that the title of Australian Master should be purely a title of honour - it should not involve a priority of selection over a non-master....Some consideration was given as to whether the creation of the title was of any value, and it was concluded that besides recognising past achievements it could have one good result in that it might encourage matches between individual players which have been all too rare.." This approach is now very dated. Not only that, but currently the ACF will not rate matches that are not for a title or play-offs for a title.


A full list of Australian Master Titles awarded by the Australian Chess Federation as at 1967 is Charlick, Crane, Esling, Jacobsen, W.Viner, Watson, A.Wallace, S.Crakenthorp, Gundersen, C.Purdy, Koshnitsky, Goldstein, Steiner, Hastings, Crowl, Ozols, Lazare, Hanks*, J.Purdy*, Endzelins, Berger, Hamilton*.

Title holders after 1967 include Fuller*, Hay*, Flatow*, Jamieson*, Rubanraut*, - *alive, current title holders.

Note: A former British champion who moved to Australia did not earn the title.

I suggest the ACF completes the full list and places it on permanent record on the ACF web site.

Of course as done to death on the soft titles (http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=3707) thread, we all know there are two kinds of FMs in Australia - there are "real FMs" who get their titles by getting their FIDE ratings above 2300 and then there are "Zonal FMs" who find theirs inside a FIDE cornflake packet but can still generally beat the likes of me. :lol:

Ian Rout
10-06-2009, 01:44 PM
I don't see much point to the Australian Master title these days. As the list of recipients shows it isn't a lesser title as national master titles in some countries are. Its purpose was most likely that many Australians who might aspire to achieve an IM title didn't get the opportunity to travel so the AM gave them some recognition. (I thought I'd said this in the previous thread but evidently not.) These days it is easier both to travel and to achieve IM norms in Australia.

If it was meant to be an FM-equivalent, which doesn't look to be the case (and there was no FM title when AM was created), there is even less point to it as you can achieve FM (a "real" one) without your feet ever leaving the ground.

The only real purpose I can think of in having the title these days is to maintain continuity with previous recipients.

TrueBeliever
10-06-2009, 01:57 PM
There is an article on the Australian Master Title by John Hanks in the book "Australian Chess Championaship 1974 - 100 Best Games" published by Chessmates of Australia. It includes a list of Australian Masters to then. That list includes both Doug Hamilton and Robert Jamieson. It is quite some time since the title was used as I have been on the ACF Council since 1997 and it was not then in use. Perhaps someone may remember when it was last used. Hanks had worked out titles for players back to the first Australian Championship or thereabouts so it could be possible, I imagine, to resurrect the title if the will were there.

DJ
It should be a relatively easy task for a competent programmer to write a program that incorporates all the Hanks rules and allows the titleholders to emerge at the far end. So it is over to you ACF pres.

Kevin Bonham
10-06-2009, 02:10 PM
It should be a relatively easy task for a competent programmer to write a program that incorporates all the Hanks rules and allows the titleholders to emerge at the far end. So it is over to you ACF pres.

Probably wouldn't even need a program; if all the rules were explicit and clear it could be done with Excel and sufficient tournament data (obtaining the latter might be the problem given all the classes of tournaments up for grabs).

Note that I am not personally proposing the revival of the title. I think it is outmoded for the reasons stated by Ian Rout. I do however think seeing which modern players would make the grade would be a useful exercise for comparison purposes.

Ian Rout
10-06-2009, 02:19 PM
I do however think seeing which modern players would make the grade would be a useful exercise for comparison purposes.
Yes it would. It might also be interesting to see who wouldn't.

Denis_Jessop
10-06-2009, 02:38 PM
I see that Shaun Press on his blog says that the original complicated Hanks rules were replaced by award based on rating at a later date but he doesn't explain how that worked. I am not sure that that is the answer and may explain why the title fell into disuse.

I see the title as originally awarded as having a different character from FIDE titles not only becuase of the different criteria but also because it was a recognition by Australian Chess of a player's standing as an Australian player.

DJ

antichrist
10-06-2009, 03:21 PM
True Believer seems to know a lot (not being sarcastic), can someone PM me his name?

TrueBeliever
10-06-2009, 04:16 PM
I see that Shaun Press on his blog says that the original complicated Hanks rules were replaced by award based on rating at a later date but he doesn't explain how that worked. I am not sure that that is the answer and may explain why the title fell into disuse.

I see the title as originally awarded as having a different character from FIDE titles not only becuase of the different criteria but also because it was a recognition by Australian Chess of a player's standing as an Australian player.

DJ
Some of the posters [not necessarily this one] seem to confuse the title of AM and FM as serving a similar purpose. The AM was or perhaps still is performance based on results in top level tournaments in Australia. An FM is something you get when your FIDE rating gets to a certain level. I for one would like to see the minutes of the meeting where it was decided to abandon the project

Denis_Jessop
10-06-2009, 07:41 PM
Some of the posters [not necessarily this one] seem to confuse the title of AM and FM as serving a similar purpose. The AM was or perhaps still is performance based on results in top level tournaments in Australia. An FM is something you get when your FIDE rating gets to a certain level. I for one would like to see the minutes of the meeting where it was decided to abandon the project

I agree that the AM title is nothing like the FM title.

As for the past ACF action in the matter, I think that (unfortunately) it is highly unlikely that the relevant minutes will be found. As far as I know the old ACF records have disappeared though they may exist somewhere. This is not a recent development.

Shaun Press had this to say on his blog (excerpt only) that indicates that the title was still alive in the 1980s but it also seems to have lapsed about the same time.


By the time I became involved with the ACF in the later 1980's, the system had been replaced with a rating based system, similar to how the USCF awards titles. While this had the benefit of making the system simpler, it had the disadvantage of removing the gravitas of the previous system. This meant that the value of the title was so diminished that both earning the title wasn't acknowledged by the ACF, and receiving the title wasn't significant for the player.
While serving as the ACF Ratings Officer I did make a proposal to revive the title using a norm based system (a la FIDE) but the ACF expressed little interest in it.

DJ

Ian Rout
10-06-2009, 08:42 PM
The procedure to qualify for the AM title is different from that for FM or IM but the purpose of the title is largely the same, namely to recognise proficiency. I don't see where AM adds anything; I can see where it used to, when there were few norm opportunities and FIDE rated players in Australia, but not any more.

Even the extent of the difference is debatable, since if the AM title still operated the tournament results contributing to meeting the criteria would often closely overlap those providing the ratings and norms for FM and IM.

Capablanca-Fan
11-06-2009, 11:18 AM
And the NZ master title is arguably harder to win than the FM title. My reasoning is that most performances leading to large gains of master points (100 needed) would generally have to be over FIDE 2300.
Dunno about that. The NZ Master rules allow cumulation of relatively mediocre performances (e.g. placings in island champs), so players who have never achieved 2300 have obtained NZM titles.

TrueBeliever
11-06-2009, 05:11 PM
When I started this thread it was in the hope that the younger generation might become more aware of the chess personalities of the past and the contribution Hanks made to Australian Chess This does not seem to have been the case. The discussion just bogged down in a comparison of the AM and FIDE titles. However some side issues came to light.
∑ Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling Mr Jessop who knows more about this than anyone does not know where the records are or whether they exist
∑ There is no recognition on the ACF web site of Australian masters past and present.
∑ It is as I expected likely that the AM has never been revoked. Merely abandoned.
∑ There does not seem to be a great respect for the FIDE master titles.
∑ There are a lot of dead people on the ACF master list and people keep on telling me about them.
Here are some more of our dead comrades.
Vic Pateras, John Herbert, Anthony Petrou, Louis Gombik, Gordon Wilby.
When I was last involved with the ACF, Hanks was still faithfully collecting his data and all the dead people on the ACF list were alive and kicking so it cannot be my fault
Please donít involve me anymore in the collection of the names of the dead, pass on the information to the relevant ratings officers. You may get a thank you from Mr. Gletsos

Basil
11-06-2009, 05:20 PM
When I started this thread it was in the hope ...
When I started reading this thread it was in the hope that you might have improved ...


Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling Mr Jessop who knows more about this than anyone does not know where the records are or whether they exist...
I was wrong. You're just a prehistoric troll and no one's buying in.

Denis_Jessop
11-06-2009, 05:45 PM
∑ Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling Mr Jessop who knows more about this than anyone does not know where the records are or whether they exist

Despite the accolade I have to say that I don't know any more than most present ACF Councillors about the whereabouts of old ACF records and at no time have I been responsible for their keeping. That is one reason why I don't know where they are. Another is that I am almost certain that any disappearance of the relevant records occurred before I was a member of the ACF Council. Theoretically the ACF should have records dating back to 1922 when it was formed but I wonder when those records were last complete and accessible.


When I started this thread it was in the hope that the younger generation might become more aware...

This depends a bit on who is classified as "the younger generation". If it's the really young ones, it's a pity that they didn't respond at all. But looking at it from our position Ian, Jono, Gunner, Kevin, Michael et al are all enviably young :) .

DJ

Kevin Bonham
11-06-2009, 05:50 PM
∑ Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling

Why do you draw the conclusion that it "probably still is" when the record keeping issues concerned date from decades ago when personnel and issues surrounding records were very different? I think this claim needs substantiation by reference to a current example. Otherwise it is just an unworthy distraction from the primary purpose you stated in the most recent post (which I agree is worthwhile, but you shouldn't take the course of the discussion as evidence that the point made about Hanks' contribution is being ignored by readers).

The scheme was evidently an excellent idea at the time and the demanding work to maintain it at the time must have been an extremely valued contribution. No one here is disputing that.


∑ There does not seem to be a great respect for the FIDE master titles.

There is a fair amount of respect for FM titles acquired in the standard fashion here. It is just unfortunate that some are acquired softly by Zonals creating a random scatter of FM titles through the 1800-2200 bracket, many of them going to players who are no different in strength to others of their rating, some of these being players who will never be true FM strength, and others of those being juniors who will very likely reach FM strength eventually but are not there yet.

I think the listing of the AM titleholders on the website together with a short description of the meaning and history of the title would be appropriate but at the same time for completeness past Australian holders of FIDE titles who are no longer with us should also be identified. Does anyone have a complete list of these?

Bill Gletsos
11-06-2009, 06:28 PM
∑ Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling Mr Jessop who knows more about this than anyone does not know where the records are or whether they existNo doubt you could provide the ACF with a full set of record keeping from your time as ACF Secretary dating back to 1922. :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

∑ There are a lot of dead people on the ACF master list and people keep on telling me about them.Have you passed any of these on to the State Ratings Officer? :hmm:
I do not recall ever receiving an email from you advsing me of the names of any dead people on the ACF master file. :owned:

Basil
11-06-2009, 06:33 PM
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=grumpy+old+troll&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2&aq=f&oq=

One of Anthony's favourite characters on Dora The Explorer. Plenty of avatar opportunities. Let me know if you need assistance ;)

antichrist
11-06-2009, 08:49 PM
When I started this thread it was in the hope that the younger generation might become more aware of the chess personalities of the past and the contribution Hanks made to Australian Chess This does not seem to have been the case. The discussion just bogged down in a comparison of the AM and FIDE titles. However some side issues came to light.
∑ Record keeping of the Australian Chess Federation has been and probably still is appalling Mr Jessop who knows more about this than anyone does not know where the records are or whether they exist
∑ There is no recognition on the ACF web site of Australian masters past and present.
∑ It is as I expected likely that the AM has never been revoked. Merely abandoned.
∑ There does not seem to be a great respect for the FIDE master titles.
∑ There are a lot of dead people on the ACF master list and people keep on telling me about them.
Here are some more of our dead comrades.
Vic Pateras, John Herbert, Anthony Petrou, Louis Gombik, Gordon Wilby.
When I was last involved with the ACF, Hanks was still faithfully collecting his data and all the dead people on the ACF list were alive and kicking so it cannot be my fault
Please donít involve me anymore in the collection of the names of the dead, pass on the information to the relevant ratings officers. You may get a thank you from Mr. Gletsos

There are also a lot of "dead" players on the circuit don't you worry, they more than make up for the non-playing dead players on the databank.

antichrist
11-06-2009, 08:50 PM
No doubt you could provide the ACF with a full set of record keeping from your time as ACF Secretary dating back to 1922. :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:
Have you passed any of these on to the State Ratings Officer? :hmm:
I do not recall ever receiving an email from you advsing me of the names of any dead people on the ACF master file. :owned:

Bill would you apreciate that in all our wills we request that you be notified to take name off the list? They should have a box to tick in that standard will you can buy.

Nicholas D-C
13-06-2009, 09:11 AM
Were there junior master titles?

MichaelBaron
13-06-2009, 11:19 AM
Were there junior master titles?

There are also CM master title now... Just send Fide some money and it will give you some kind of title/fide rating :).

Denis_Jessop
14-06-2009, 02:07 PM
Were there junior master titles?


No; but I think that the Australian Women's Chess League had women's master title. That's as far as it went.

DJ

PS That quote from Fischer is odd. If it took him 98% of his mental energy to beat the others using only 2%, the others could have flogged him if they upped theirs to 5 :D

ElevatorEscapee
15-06-2009, 09:10 PM
OK - it looks like this thread has raised a few questions.

(Personally, Yes, I believe there should be some recognition of the likes of John Hanks for his ability to win the national title, and a national master title.)

However:

What actually happens to the ratings of the players who have passed on?

What should happen with ratings of players who have passed on?

What does the Australian Chess Community think should happen to those ratings?

Just some of my personal musings with no political overtones. :)

kjenhager
15-06-2009, 09:46 PM
What actually happens to the ratings of the players who have passed on? cryogenics ?


What should happen with ratings of players who have passed on?
be included in their epitaphs ?

What does the Australian Chess Community think should happen to those ratings?
be used as raffle ticket numbers for free entry to the restaurant at the end of the universe.

Denis_Jessop
15-06-2009, 09:54 PM
OK - it looks like this thread has raised a few questions.

(Personally, Yes, I believe there should be some recognition of the likes of John Hanks for his ability to win the national title, and a national master title.)

However:

What actually happens to the ratings of the players who have passed on?

What should happen with ratings of players who have passed on?

What does the Australian Chess Community think should happen to those ratings?

Just some of my personal musings with no political overtones. :)

To these issues one should add what happens to the ratings of players who are terminally inactive? That is, there are a vast number of players on the Master File who, though still alive, are unlikely ever to play chess again. This question merely raises an issue of what is so special about actually dead players when there are very many virtually dead ones there too. Furthermore is this a practical issue?

DJ

ElevatorEscapee
15-06-2009, 11:34 PM
Um... yeah...

Dennis, you seem uncharacteristacly insensitive when it comes to this. :(

I am sorry if you don't understand this, but the family's of chess players who have passed away don't necessarily want to receive the chess rating of their former family member.

Much better to have that member entered into a "hall of fame", even if only for lower rated players. :)

Ian Rout
16-06-2009, 10:12 AM
I don't understand the question. A person's last rating is a piece of data. It can't be eliminated (though it's convenient to remove it from the master file which is a list of people who might conceivably turn up at a tournament), except by deleting it from everywhere it's recorded and killing everybody who knows it. For the same reason, that it's a fact and not a thing, it can't be put in a box and hung on a wall.

It's like saying what do we do with a deceased person's shoe size or blood group or tax file number.

Desmond
16-06-2009, 10:23 AM
It's like saying what do we do with a deceased person's shoe size or blood group or tax file number.Archive them.

Denis_Jessop
16-06-2009, 12:52 PM
Um... yeah...

Dennis, you seem uncharacteristacly insensitive when it comes to this. :(

I am sorry if you don't understand this, but the family's of chess players who have passed away don't necessarily want to receive the chess rating of their former family member.

Much better to have that member entered into a "hall of fame", even if only for lower rated players. :)

Perhaps I didn't get your point. I think we may be addressing different questions. I was simply looking at the factual situation that the presence of the names of dead players on the Master File is no different from that of living players who haven't played for years.

Actually this is irrelevant to this thread as far as I can see as it has nothing to do with the Australian Master title and its criteria.

DJ

Sutek
16-06-2009, 01:46 PM
Were there junior master titles?

There was an NSW Junior Master title introduced by Ralph Jackson some years ago but it just seemed to fade away.

btw I'm still waiting for my certificate!

Sutek
16-06-2009, 02:00 PM
Logically yes, physically no.
No.

Bill,

ICCF keeps deceased players in their rating database but pretty sure no one else does.


ICCF Ratings (http://www.iccf-webchess.com/RatingList.aspx)

TrueBeliever
16-06-2009, 04:15 PM
Why do you draw the conclusion that it "probably still is" when the record keeping issues concerned date from decades ago when personnel and issues surrounding records were very different? I think this claim needs substantiation by reference to a current example. Otherwise it is just an unworthy distraction from the primary purpose you stated in the most recent post (which I agree is worthwhile, but you shouldn't take the course of the discussion as evidence that the point made about Hanks' contribution is being ignored by readers).

The scheme was evidently an excellent idea at the time and the demanding work to maintain it at the time must have been an extremely valued contribution. No one here is disputing that.?

Well... no one thought of recording his work and a list the Australian Masters until I brought it up
I stand by my comment about the ACF's lack of records. It may well be that mr Gletsos's computer is full of up to date facts but but I meant of course easy find records accessible to the public. Where would one find ACF championship tournament archives? Junior Tournament archives? Lists of past ACF presidents. FIDE masters since 2007
I agree with mr Jessop that the dead list is irrelevant to this thread. It came as a consequence of my off hand remark about importing Hanks from the SP import list

antichrist
17-06-2009, 06:04 PM
I would be careful about putting the ratingon an epitaph coz God may read it and know what we were doing on Sunday instead of going to church and send us down below instead. No thanks.

peter_parr
18-06-2009, 11:25 AM
A full list of Australian Master Titles awarded by the Australian Chess Federation as at 1967 is Charlick, Crane, Esling, Jacobsen, W.Viner, Watson, A.Wallace, S.Crakenthorp, Gundersen, C.Purdy, Koshnitsky, Goldstein, Steiner, Hastings, Crowl, Ozols, Lazare, Hanks*, J.Purdy*, Endzelins, Berger, Hamilton*. Title holders after 1967 include Fuller*, Hay*, Flatow*, Jamieson*, Rubanraut*, - *alive, current title holders.

Since this posting Rubanraut and Hanks have passed away.

This list is subject to confirmation by ACF archivist/historian. For further reading see ACF minutes 1922-2009(The Bridge Association publishes its minutes on its web site so they do not get lost),Cecil Purdy's national magazine 1929-1967 (39 yrs),Bernie Johnson's national magazine 1966-1983(16.5 yrs),and the informative Peter Parr's national magazine 1978/79 and later 1983-1999(17 yrs) - 3 editors in 72 years - ACF Master points many references. See also John Van Manen's 9 volumes of books on early Australian chess history or Evelyn Koshnitsky's 28 years of Australian Women's magazines for ACF Women's Master title or SMH columns 36.5 yrs.

100 Australian Chess Federation Master Title points was difficult. I won the NSW State Championship in 1968 scoring 12.5 points from 16 games. I played 5 games against Australian Masters(scoring 90% - 4.5/5) and a number of games against Australian Candidate Masters. This gave me a total of 17.5 ACF Master points in the NSW Champ 1968 (slower time control 16 not 9 games). I played dozens of games against a total of 11 Australian Masters including all 7 title-holders since 1963. Ozols,Hanks,Hamilton,J.Purdy,C.Purdy,Fuller,Hay,Ru banraut,Jamieson,Flatow,Browne. Only GM Browne emerged with a clean record (1/1).

The GM norm was 2500 when ACF Master Titles were no longer awarded - mid 1976. The ACF Master title was equivalent to International Master. FIDE Masters at 2300 are not leading Australians but all 28 Australian Masters listed above were among the very best in their time. 15 received the title for performances before FIDE introduced GM and IM titles in 1950. 13 earned their title for performances after 1950. If the title continued 1976-2009 all new title holders would be 2400 +IMís.

I have suggested before that all current Australian Masters should be listed on the ACF web page. There are 7 who hold the title awarded by ACF for the term of their natural life. 1960 J.Purdy,1967 D.Hamilton,1969 A.Flatow,1971 W.Browne,1971 M.Fuller,1971 T.Hay,1973 R.Jamieson
As well as current ACF Australian Womens Masters - 94-year-old Evelyn Koshnitsky has been in charge of this for the last 70+ years.

There should be recorded the other 21 Australian Masters who have passed away. I note Hanks records the ACF Masters from 1922 but Sunnucks Encyclopedia records all the earlier Australian Masters. (Check van Manen's 9 volumes).

One must not forget the feats of our great predecessors eg. Prof Gunnar Gundersen Australian Master, 11 times champion of Victoria.

It was a common practice until about 30 years ago for all major countries to award national master titles. The ACF Master Title was held in high regard as so called "soft titles" (9 games in one weak event) was totally impossible. 100 master points - many in Australian championships 1st,2nd or 3rd no exceptions. GM Y.Seirawan suggested that FIDE "soft titles" from Australia be returned to FIDE - the word " Master" should have meaning.

Finally several years ago I started a PERSONALIA page of numerous NSW players which appears on the NSWCA web site NSWCA PERSONALIA (http://www.nswca.org.au/personalia2008.shtml)

My annual update submitted to the NSWCA AGM in November 2008 has not yet appeared. I will try again for November 2009. All GM norms, IM norms,(England has all these on their website),all IA norms, IO norms, CCLA titles, FIDE commissions etc etc should all appear on every state association website on the PERSONALIA page. The ACF can then compile a complete file for the ACF website - a simple job once started is easy to update annually.

Sadly those who paid for an ACF Life Membership 35 years ago (not to be confused with hon. life members) were recorded on a large box of index cards which have ended up in the garbage bin of history.

Peter Parr OAM

FM_Bill
24-11-2009, 08:55 AM
GM Y.Seirawan suggested that FIDE "soft titles" from Australia be returned to FIDE - the word " Master" should have meaning.

I have to agree with Seirawan here.

A title from a single 9 round open tournament, where the most of the opponents
could be below master rating.
What a joke.

I like the idea of a national master title, either based on 3 norms or even the USCF system, including life masters.

Irene
30-01-2010, 07:41 AM
The Australian Master Titles were meant to be ranked below the International Titles, and in the past Australia had very few players with International Titles. I remember the day Australia got it's first Grandmaster.

Further to this Master Title list you are all talking about, what has also disappeared from the Australian Chess Federation is the Womens Master Title list, which was the only away to honour outstanding Australian women players in the past. It was formulated by the new Australian Womens Chess League (now defunct) and ratified by the Australian Chess Federation about 1980 when I was on the Australian Chess Federation as the South Australian Delegate. I then also became the first Women's Master Points recorder on the ACF (used to know John Hanks well). Now the ACF seems to have no records at all of this, either of the people awarded the title or the method for awarding it.

Recalling this from memory now 30 years ago: The first 2 places were awarded to outstanding women players who played in the 1930s to early 1950who were deceased (known to Evelyn Koshnitsky), Narelle Kellner and Marion McGrath (Mott) were also awarded the title and I was the 6th woman to receive it. At least one other title was awarded after me, and all my records were of course passed on to the next generation of ACF delegates when they moved from Melbourne. Again from memory what women needed was 1 win in the Australian Womens Championship or coming 2nd or 3rd twice (my qualifier) plus several wins in the State Womens Championships; and optionally any wins in the Australian Girls Championships. I think the total points had to be 32 (could not swear to this now). I was the first Australian Girls Champion, but remember I did not even need this to qualify.

Adamski
30-01-2010, 08:34 AM
The Australian Master Titles were meant to be ranked below the International Titles, and in the past Australia had very few players with International Titles. I remember the day Australia got it's first Grandmaster.

Further to this Master Title list you are all talking about, what has also disappeared from the Australian Chess Federation is the Womens Master Title list, which was the only away to honour outstanding Australian women players in the past. It was formulated by the new Australian Womens Chess League (now defunct) and ratified by the Australian Chess Federation about 1980 when I was on the Australian Chess Federation as the South Australian Delegate. I then also became the first Women's Master Points recorder on the ACF (used to know John Hanks well). Now the ACF seems to have no records at all of this, either of the people awarded the title or the method for awarding it.

Recalling this from memory now 30 years ago: The first 2 places were awarded to outstanding women players who played in the 1930s to early 1950who were deceased (known to Evelyn Koshnitsky), Narelle Kellner and Marion McGrath (Mott) were also awarded the title and I was the 6th woman to receive it. At least one other title was awarded after me, and all my records were of course passed on to the next generation of ACF delegates when they moved from Melbourne. Again from memory what women needed was 1 win in the Australian Womens Championship or coming 2nd or 3rd twice (my qualifier) plus several wins in the State Womens Championships; and optionally any wins in the Australian Girls Championships. I think the total points had to be 32 (could not swear to this now). I was the first Australian Girls Champion, but remember I did not even need this to qualify.Very interesting, Irene. As a historian by university training, I hope all this chess history from you, Peter Parr and others can be documented accurately.

Denis_Jessop
30-01-2010, 10:51 AM
I think that it is unlikely that any first-hand ACF records now exist of either title. Because of the itinerant nature of the ACF administration in the past and even because the Secretary and his successor live in different places, records tend not to be passed on from one to the next.

From the information available on this thread and from other sources such as chess magazines it may be possible to reconstruct the Master Title lists for the ACF records on the website. The ACF could also then consider whether, in current circumstances, revival of the titles would be a good idea.

Clearly, I think, the previous title holders' names should appear on the Honours Board if they can be correctly identified. The titles were official ACF ones and have never been revoked to my knowledge.

DJ

Irene
31-01-2010, 03:05 PM
It would be great to do this (resurrect both lists). I had no idea the ACF had lost the records, and I cleared out a lot of my old paperwork 5 years ago when I moved - but I might have kept some of it (huge job with so many unpacked boxes still in the garage - age and health thing I have to work with now!!). I'll let you know what I find. I wrote to the ACF about this 3 years ago and they asked for any information I had - were very interested. However with my computer wiped out I lost this email. Then I wrote again 6 months ago with all the info in my post above and never received any reply from them. So whatever I do come across (mens and womens) I'll let you know on here. I'm sure these lists were printed in Chess in Australia, and even the Andersen Collection in Melbourne should have copies of all the old "Chess in Australia"s. Robert Jamieson ran Waverley Chess Club in those days where I was playing A Reserve and I was being coached by a young Darryn Johannsen, then later by a young Ian Rogers.

Denis_Jessop
31-01-2010, 08:01 PM
It would be great to do this (resurrect both lists). I had no idea the ACF had lost the records, and I cleared out a lot of my old paperwork 5 years ago when I moved - but I might have kept some of it (huge job with so many unpacked boxes still in the garage - age and health thing I have to work with now!!). I'll let you know what I find. I wrote to the ACF about this 3 years ago and they asked for any information I had - were very interested. However with my computer wiped out I lost this email. Then I wrote again 6 months ago with all the info in my post above and never received any reply from them. So whatever I do come across (mens and womens) I'll let you know on here. I'm sure these lists were printed in Chess in Australia, and even the Andersen Collection in Melbourne should have copies of all the old "Chess in Australia"s. Robert Jamieson ran Waverley Chess Club in those days where I was playing A Reserve and I was being coached by a young Darryn Johannsen, then later by a young Ian Rogers.

Hi Irene

The e-mails to which you refer were, I think, those that you and I exchanged. We also spoke on the phone I think. Unfortunately they recently sufferred the same fate at my end. My computer's hard drive crashed as did the back-up one and the e-mails plus a lot more are lost unless some lucky retrieval occurs. I don't recall a communication 6 months ago - did you send it to me or to Gary Wastell, perhaps?

I can't remember if I mentioned the matter to the ACF Council but this time I intend to put together all the information I can find from this thread and other people (including you) and places, and consult my ACF colleagues as at least one of them has a comprehensive collection of old magazines including a complete set of CIA/ACM). I shall propose that the existing masters' names be placed on the ACF website and shall raise the question whether the titles should be revived for the future.

DJ

PS The loss of records is not unusual with voluntary bodies like this. A couple of other bodies of a similar kind with which I have been connected have had a similar fate (though the connection is not causal :)

Irene
01-02-2010, 05:52 AM
My email was just to the ACF email address. My hard drive actually melted with heat - so nothing was recoverable. I've been thinking if I do find anything it might be wise to send it to your email address, rather than tell you here, though I'm not sure I can do a scan and find it to attach. Photocopy and mail might be good. I definitely would have kept all my mothers cuttings etc. - she was proud of my chess career, and in these could be information on other players and their titles as well. I often worked in the Andersen Collection in the old days and know they were subscribing and storing current "Chess in Australia". Perhaps I or someone in Melbourne could visit them to research the Master titles. Full lists of ratings used to be published in them every year with the Master tags. It seems the National Library only has 1992 onwards. I'm actually looking forward to the challenge of seeing what I can find in print.

Denis_Jessop
01-02-2010, 11:23 AM
My email was just to the ACF email address. My hard drive actually melted with heat - so nothing was recoverable. I've been thinking if I do find anything it might be wise to send it to your email address, rather than tell you here, though I'm not sure I can do a scan and find it to attach. Photocopy and mail might be good. I definitely would have kept all my mothers cuttings etc. - she was proud of my chess career, and in these could be information on other players and their titles as well. I often worked in the Andersen Collection in the old days and know they were subscribing and storing current "Chess in Australia". Perhaps I or someone in Melbourne could visit them to research the Master titles. Full lists of ratings used to be published in them every year with the Master tags. It seems the National Library only has 1992 onwards. I'm actually looking forward to the challenge of seeing what I can find in print.

I'd be very happy to receive via e-mail anything that you can provide on the titles. That goes for others who read this thread too. I am hoping to put together as much information as possible. The Hanks article, which I have, gives a comprehensive account of the title to 1974 so it's later news that is most needed.

Which ACF e-mail address did you use? The only "Official" ones I know of are the Newsletter one and those on the FIDE website.

DJ

PS I've just added the option of sending me an e-mail via this forum which wasn't set before. Now you can send me either a PM or an e-mail. The latter would be preferable for this matter.

FM_Bill
06-07-2010, 03:54 PM
The 1974 Australian championship tournament book has an article by Hanks on the Master Point system which included all current masters.

One thing I noticed, of the 9 masters I played, I had a plus score against 6 or 7 of them.

jammo
08-07-2010, 06:28 PM
It's interesting that some people assume that ACF records have been lost. I imagine that Wastell has kept his records and I certainly kept everything as part of my chess library. Whether I can find a particular item is another question!

Bill Gletsos
08-07-2010, 11:58 PM
The Title was introduced by the ACF in 1959.

The primary sources for the following list are:

An article in "Chess World" - "Australian Master Title" by CJS Purdy, November 1959, p.241;

"Australian Master Title" by J N Hanks ("Australian Chess Championsip 1974. p.94;


Australian Master Title Holders

F J Esling

H Charlick

William Crane

J L Jacobsen

The above granted the title in 1959 as having earned it before 1922 (the year of the foundation of the ACF).

1922 C G Watson

1922 W S Viner

1925 A E N Wallace

1926 S Crakanthorp

1929 G Gundersen

1930 C J S Purdy

1932 G Koshnitsky

1936 M E Goldstein

1945 L Steiner

1946 G H Hastings

1948 F A Crowl

1952 K Ozols

1954 S Lazare

1956 J N Hanks

The above calculated at 1959 to have earned the title as if the rules for it had been in force since 1922.

1960 J Purdy

1960 L Endzelins

1963 B Berger

1967 D G Hamilton

1969 A Flatow

1971 W Browne

1971 M Fuller

1971 T Hay

1973 R Jamieson

The above are cited in Hanks' article. He also lists the others above listed by Purdy but does not include Gundersen. This would appear to be an error.

I have found the following from entires in issues of Chess in Australia.

1975 T Shaw (reference CIA June 1976)

1980 I Rogers (reference CIA December 1980)

1984 D Johansen (reference CIA July 1984)

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2010, 12:08 AM
The ACF has conferred the title of Australian Women's Chess Master, as from 1st January 1979 on

Australian Women Chess Masters

Joan Stagpool

Edna Steiner

Narelle Kellner

Lynda Pope (Maddern)

Marion McGrath

Cathy Chua (Depasquale)

(reference for the above CIA August 1979)

1980 Irene Hawkesworth (reference CIA March 1980)

1982 Anne Slavotinek (reference CIA July 1982)

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2010, 12:11 AM
Serge Rubanraut is shown with 93.5 points in CIA June 1976 and Mike Woodhams with 98.5 points in CIA June 1977 but there is no subsequent mention that either became a master.

Tony Dowden
22-07-2010, 09:17 PM
Dunno about that. The NZ Master rules allow cumulation of relatively mediocre performances (e.g. placings in island champs), so players who have never achieved 2300 have obtained NZM titles.

True, but has anyone has ever done so largely via the Island championships?

Non-FM's such as Haase, Stuart and I all won the bulk of the points in our NM titles by playing in Championships. Haase claimed a bundle by winning the NZ title in 1961/62 (way before FM titles existed) and Stuart played in vast numbers of NZ champs. In my case I was moreorless inactive for 15 years (no master points), so possibly missed a chance to top 2300.

>>Mod - perhaps this should go to an NZ thread!<<