10115 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
A couple more points: First, Optimissed, I guess there must be some definition you're referring to where experts are said to be as skilled in their field as theoretically possible. I don't know about you, but I hear phrases all the time like "these dozen people, all experts in the field, disagree on such and such." In fact it's nearly impossible to actually master anything -- even Carlsen will always have things he can't do. Even if he learns to play a perfect classical game, we'll just say he can't play a perfect blitz game, and if he does that, then he can't play a perfect bullet game, and so on. Does this mean we should just never use distinctions like "expert" or "master?" Some could argue that, although then we would just keep saying stuff like "this guy is really good, this other guy is really really good, and this guy is really really really good" -- I'd rather just give them a few cool names :)
There are also some other ways to interpret our terminology for distinctions in skill. For example, maybe when we say a 2200 is a "master" we are thinking more like "master in the basics of the game," as opposed to the whole game -- he is a master in some sense but perhaps a grandmaster can show a master "how little he really knows," how the "master's mastery" is only with regard to a limited amount of features of the game, and when we see a better player come along, we realize there is more to mastery than what first appeared and so want to upgrade it by inserting a "grand."
Well, again, I kind of like that, and probably most people do, even if it's a little arbitrary. Perhaps you don't, which is fine, but the point is, people have other considerations for their terminology other than just their absolute literal meaning.
take a look at this, it has many well thought comments
Anybody heard of the word FUN on this thread ?
<<When I say mass, do I mean the mass of something in grams or going to church? Look at the context.>>Snore ...Incidentally, the philosopher Schopenhauer apparently listed 38 methods of winning arguments, one of which was to use alternative meanings, for words, than those your opponent intended. So he wants to use words out of context. If it was in a philosophy group I'd probably just throw Schopenhauer out for being a bolshy idiot.Another method he recommended was to make his opponent angry. I wonder how he would react to a boxing of his ears? Is there a "philosophical rule" that says you can't execute someone for being a troll? Obviously you'd be subject to wider laws but ..... I was once thrown out of a chess congress for calling someone a prat. A bit harsh, one might think ... and it wasn't during a game and also it was in retaliation to being picked on. However, the FIDE arbiter who threw me out didn't like me and also the FIDE arbiter was a completely biassed and pompous idiot. What do we do with authority, eh? :)
I would imagine you are getting at something, but I don't know what -- clarify it if you want me to know, because I'm not going to spend a long time digging for your point deep in the sand.
If you want I can elucidate my rather simple thesis right now: Yes, we are putting fun words like "grand" in front of "master," pretending in some non-literal sense that there is a rank above mastery. And that doesn't make me upset :) Maybe it makes you upset, ok, so now we know what we think :)
Just close your eyes and hope for the best.
DOH! I keep forgetting to close my eyes. Mucho gracias.
It would be like talking to treacle.
Yes, when people make comments like that it must be a sign of their great arguments, because not just any random person could make such simple comments like that!
Sorry, I foolishly imagined that the word "expert" was being used in its normal sense ... that of , well, being an expert, with all nominal distinctions like GM, IM, FM and God knows what just forgotten for the time being in the interest of simple communication. After all, "Grandmaster" or "Chessdullard" weren't used as a counterpoint to "expert" so I'm afraid I foolishly imagined that someone was speaking English and not Chessese. OK I was wrong.
You're not foolish for preferring what you prefer. Although I don't think everyone who doesn't prefer your way is foolish either.
Incidentally, I'm right and you are wrong. If you want to use Master as a title indicating ability, you capitalise it. Similarly, you should capitalise Expert, to distinguish it from the normal usage of expert. It wasn't capitalised and so my assumption should have been accepted as correct! Now, be told! :PBleedin idjits!!
I tend to be more logical in my thought processes while playing chess (and in general), perhaps because I have developed more strategy over time, though I have developed tactics as well (tactics seem to be more intuitive).
I'm not going to capitalize just for you, Optimissed, since you are the only chess player on the planet for which it is a problem :)
Well then you can hardly expect others to know what you're talking about if you can't even follow simple and generally accepted conventions regarding communication, now can you?
Yeah, assume that I don't because I can't. That sounds plausible.
Lovely talking to you.Bye.
Who is more physically attractive
by LongIslandMark 7 minutes ago
How do I beat a 2000+?
by Optimissed 10 minutes ago
Why did you choose the username you have?
by Diriyah 14 minutes ago
by charles49 15 minutes ago
Best groups for . . . ?
by aww-rats 16 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by A-J-S 21 minutes ago
French Players: Learn to embrace the Exchange Variation!
by tmkroll 23 minutes ago
Post your chess set
by Smellfungus 27 minutes ago
Is Aronian overrated
by Smellfungus 31 minutes ago
How good do you have to be to play the Sicilian
by AKAL1 48 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!