Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

If titles were a little more accurate


  • 17 months ago · Quote · #1

    DrCheckevertim

    2400+ Chess "Expert"

    2600+ Chess "Master"

    Top 10: Chess "GrandMaster"

     

    or

     

    2300+ Chess "Expert"

    2500+ Chess "Master"

    Top 20/40/50/100: Chess "GrandMaster"

     

    What do you think?

     

    Here's my pure speculation:

    Compared to an amateur player, a 2400 or even 2200 is extremely good, yes. But in terms of chess itself, when looking at it from the top down -- If the best players, let's say 2800 level players, can destroy a 2200-2400 like it's nothing... is 2200-2400 really a "chess master?"

    And then, "GrandMaster" should be extremely exclusive, for the absolute best of the best.

     

    The word "expert" itself implies near mastery, aint that good enough? The term already implies a relatively elite level of skill.

     

    Just some thoughts. This is based on what I've observed of titled players' perception of their ratings and level of skill.

     

    Some interesting articles

    http://www.chess.com/article/view/deep-thinking-and-the-differences-between-titled-players

    http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/lsquoa-gm-is-a-gmrsquo

     

    I'd like to hear what other people have to say on this topic, especially stronger/titled players.

    I don't know if anything will change with FIDE or whatever, and certainly not due to this thread on chess.com, but just for discussions sake. :)

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #2

    needspraxis

    I hope that pie is really cocunut creme, and not those cheap shaving creamm ones like at WGN.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #3

    DrCheckevertim

    I believe it to be whipped cream.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #4

    TheBigDecline

    It should be like in Pokemon: For every major city you have a Gym leader from who you collect badges once you beat them and in order to become the next 'Champ', you need to challenge and defeat the Elite 4 (the four best players/Pokemon trainers in the world) and the current person holding that title.

    Logical and down-to-earth.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #5

    Roeczak

    what ifyou make a draw;D

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #6

    TheBigDecline

    Roeczak wrote:

    what ifyou make a draw;D

    A draw counts as 0. You would have to appoint a rematch, as only a win would earn you that badge.

    And 'em badges would be made out of solid gold, so one could afford to travel all across the world to collect all of them.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #7

    TheLastSupper

    TheBigDecline wrote:

    It should be like in Pokemon: For every major city you have a Gym leader from who you collect badges once you beat them and in order to become the next 'Champ', you need to challenge and defeat the Elite 4 (the four best players/Pokemon trainers in the world) and the current person holding that title.

    Logical and down-to-earth.

    That would be awesome.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #8

    hicetnunc

    2400 is not that bad... I mean an IM would beat the pulp out of any recreational player 100/100 times blindfolded... Sounds like a master performance to me Smile

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #9

    DrCheckevertim

    edit: added this post to the original post

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #10

    SocialPanda

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #11

    TragicAffair

    I would be so pissed off if I were 11th.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #12

    SocialPanda

    TheBigDecline wrote:

    It should be like in Pokemon: For every major city you have a Gym leader from who you collect badges once you beat them and in order to become the next 'Champ', you need to challenge and defeat the Elite 4 (the four best players/Pokemon trainers in the world) and the current person holding that title.

    Logical and down-to-earth.

    This is the best proposal I have ever read to combat GM title devaluation.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #13

    DrCheckevertim

    socialista wrote:

    Yes I definitely did! I linked it in my post above yours.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #14

    SocialPanda

    DrCheckevertim wrote:
    socialista wrote:

    Yes I definitely did! I linked it in my post above yours.

    You are right, since I saw a chess.com link, I though it was another thing.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #15

    DrCheckevertim

    TragicAffair wrote:

    I would be so pissed off if I were 11th.

    Hah. Would make you fight hard to move up a spot, eh?

    Also, I edited my original post to add a 2nd set of hypothetical values.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #16

    SocialPanda

    DrCheckevertim wrote:
    TragicAffair wrote:

    I would be so pissed off if I were 11th.

    Hah. Would make you fight hard to move up a spot, eh?

    Also, I edited my original post to add a 2nd set of hypothetical values.

    So, you just bend the rules to make TragicAffair a GM???

    This just doesn´t look fair for the 101th player.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #17

    DrCheckevertim

    The 101th player would just have to deal with it. :)

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #18

    Conflagration_Planet

    Smile

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #19

    DrCheckevertim

    I really like this:

    2300+ Chess "Expert"

    2500+ Chess "Master"

    Top 50: Chess "GrandMaster"

    Laughing

  • 15 months ago · Quote · #20

    Conflagration_Planet

    Makes sense.


Back to Top

Post your reply: