Lots of fragile egos, and people with a lot of time to waste featured lately in this thread. Why not stay on the thread's TOPIC and move your bickering and mental masturbation to a new thread?
Have you ever met a GM? Story?
Sort:
ponz111 wrote:
One grandmaster I've played is Daniel M Fleetwood [see wikipedia]
He is an American scientist, inventor, engineer, and innovator.
He chess achievements barely mentioned as he has achieved so much in other fields.
He is one heck of a down to earth, nice guy, also.
I played a game with him way before chess engines. He worked for decades to become a grandmaster. Only when chess engines started being used did he also have to use them. But almost all his success in chess came before chess engines were being used.
And some want to take away the chess title he earned. This is the height of belittlement by some players who could not begin to do the chess achievements he has already done.
Here's a prime example of why there should be a distinction made ! Mr Fleetwood has a rating floor of 1800 otb which means he has never been higher than 2100 otb uscf rating and is currently barely over 2000 . To call him a GM while otb GMs must be 2500 otb AND get the necessary norms just isnt fair/right ! I have no problem with calling him a CGM , the C standing for Correspondence ofcourse . He isnt the worst case though , at least he has been over 2000 otb , there are some who havent been over A class otb ! I will check some more for you ponz ...
Here's another : GM Edward P Duliba has a correspondence rating of 2485 and an otb rating of 1809 and has never been over 1900 otb ! LOL What a joke to equate OTB GMs with their Correspondence counterparts/pretenders ! The difference didnt used to be so comical/glaring back before engines took over and thats when the best correspondence players were also titled players in OTB . Now its a circus ...
OperationOverlord wrote:
Lots of fragile egos, and people with a lot of time to waste featured lately in this thread. Why not stay on the thread's TOPIC and move your bickering and mental masturbation to a new thread?
KarryGaspar0v wrote:
less title douchbaggery and more GM stories for those of us who never talked to one would be greatly appreciated :)
+1
Couldn't agree more.
This forum should be about playing or meeting GMs.
The ones I have met or played were all down to earth, very nice, and very intelligent people.
I am sorry to react so much when someone tries to put them down.
fide titles are most important of all types of titles you can get
3 hours ago · Quote · #182
Here's another : GM Edward P Duliba has a correspondence rating of 2485 and an otb rating of 1809 and has never been over 1900 otb ! LOL What a joke to equate OTB GMs with their Correspondence counterparts/pretenders ! The difference didnt used to be so comical/glaring back before engines took over and thats when the best correspondence players were also titled players in OTB . Now its a circus ...
Try this, a player who is 1500 uscf and his correspondence rating is 2450, or worst 2600 correspondence rating and he plays like a 1600 elo. I don't trust correspondence rating at all.
and then there is a person whose USCF Performance rating for a whole year and 3 tournaments was 2438 and then switched to correspondence [before engines] and worked his rating to above 2500.
By the way it was not mentioned which correspondence rating being referred to?--ICCF or the so called correspondence rating here on chess.com?
thread hijack ... success!
true, thread hijacked again.
I suggest those who want to put down correspondence grandmasters start their own thread on this.
[some people equate chess.com ratings with other ratings and chess.com does not have a good rating system is some regards]
Please start your own thread if you wish to put down a group of grandmasters.
less title douchbaggery and more GM stories for those of us who never talked to one would be greatly appreciated :)