Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42

Thread: A New Title

  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047

    A New Title

    The ACP and FIDE discussed the idea of a new title above that of the GM. What do you think of this idea?

    http://closetgrandmaster.blogspot.com/

    AR

  2. #2
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    262
    Ridiculous, what are going to call it. GWIBTGM (guy who is better than Grand Masters)

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,322
    I would add to this that maybe instead of creating new titles, maybe titles shouldnt be for life. Perhaps players should be required to meet the standard for a title say every 5 years ie a GM must make their norm standards within a 5 year period.

  4. #4
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    262
    There are many Women competitiors which are only rated from 1500-1900 and are still considered as WFM WIM is it possible to lose the title after it is earned or is it kept for a lifetime

  5. #5
    CC International Master Bereaved's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Hi Frank,
    the titles all last forever (FM,IM,GM,WFM,WIM,WGM)
    I don't know about the candidate master title I read of elsewhere, or those from the problem solving commission,
    Take care and God Bless, Macavity

    There are also some statutes set in place from FIDE as how to deal with low rated GM's who are given the average rating of the field in Round Robins

  6. #6
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    maybe titles shouldnt be for life. .
    nigel short is one who favours this however why put people through the stress of trying to achieve the (GM) title again and again? the title should be for life except that as a grandmaster you are allowed to play competitively using the title so long as you don't fall below 2300. once below that you are labelled egm emeritus grandmaster ... and retired for life from top level competitions.


    eclectic
    .

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,322
    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    nigel short is one who favours this however why put people through the stress of trying to achieve the (GM) title again and again?
    Because the title should be a reflection of your current playing standard. Even though the discussion started here with talk of gm's and super gm titles, I certainly think that lifetime titles for the lesser titles is a joke. But i have talked about this before and so nothing I can say is new.

  8. #8
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840

    let the rating say it

    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Because the title should be a reflection of your current playing standard. Even though the discussion started here with talk of gm's and super gm titles, I certainly think that lifetime titles for the lesser titles is a joke. But i have talked about this before and so nothing I can say is new.
    could it perhaps be that ratings were themselves introduced for precisely that reason viz that titles were no longer reflecting the intended playing strength?

    automatic GM title if at least 2550 for 4 consecutive rating periods?

    eclectic
    .

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,322
    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    could it perhaps be that ratings were themselves introduced for precisely that reason viz that titles were no longer reflecting the intended playing strength?

    automatic GM title if at least 2550 for 4 consecutive rating periods?

    eclectic
    not sure why titles are actually necessary

  10. #10
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    not sure why titles are actually necessary
    I agree

  11. #11
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,575
    I guess titles provide some sort of incentive. Just look at the interest that norms generate in tournaments and therefore they encourage organisers to run higher quality tournaments.

    The argument is that the GM title has lost it's original intention with so many GMs running around (in certain contries at least). Some believe a new title should be introduced to capture the spirit of the original GM title. Personally, I think it is a good idea and would like to see the introduction of something like Super GM which a player has to be ranking in the top 20 players in the world or something to qualify for.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  12. #12
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    262
    Maybe it can be called closet Grandmaster

  13. #13
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,394
    There were originally only a few dozen GMs. Some inflation in the number is justified by improvements in chess technique but probably not as much inflation as there has been.

    I'd suggest have a SuperGM title which a player would qualify for by maintaining a top 20 position in the rating list for a certain minimum number of ratings periods including a certain minimum number of games against other top 20 players and by winning appropriate SuperGM norms.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  14. #14
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,428
    Ratings are a bit different from titles, in that you can get a good rating from a relatively small number of games, and performing well against undistinguished opposition. You can also maintain it by selecting your events and opponents carefully. A GM, on the other hand, has been tested against the best of the best and at least matched them. Well that's the theory.

    It used to be that "grandmaster" was a title to identify the best players. These days we know who the best players are, its the level just below who need GM titles to distinguish them from IMs. It's a bit like a PhD, most people wouldn't know or care if Einstein had one but having one is essential to the working academic, and I don't know of any push to scrap PhDs.

    Although it can be argued that the title system is outmoded and unnecessary (what other sports have it; some of the martial arts maybe?), and even pointless when there are so many GMs, it's part of the mystique of chess. In promoting the game its better to tell the media that Grandmaster Rogers is playing, Mr Rogers wouldn't be such a drawcard. Historically the terms "master" and "grandmaster" were used long before the structure was codified so it's a natural part of the game.

    But Frank has pointed out a major problem, they've painted themselves into a corner as far getting a name for a new title. Maybe greatgrandmaster.

  15. #15
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Rout
    But Frank has pointed out a major problem, they've painted themselves into a corner as far getting a name for a new title. Maybe greatgrandmaster.
    I can't see that at all. Super GM is a term which has had currency for a number of years. If they want a new title, all that is required is to codify it.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Chessbase article reporting that the WFM title doesnt exist?
    By Garvinator in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-08-2005, 12:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •