Cutoff Rating When No Longer Patzer ?

i think it all depends where you are looking from. I mean a 2700 playing a 2400 is gonna regard him as a patzer who he should beat whilse if I am  playing the 2400 he is gonna regard me as a patzer who he should beat and then I go and play some 1200 who I would regard as a patzer who I should beat. I would be cowering in fear whilse playing the 2400 but he is still regarded as an easy win for the 2700gm. So being a patzer is all in the eye of the beholder

patzerdom ends when people stop playing hope chess, and when hope chess no longer is effective when their opponants use it. id say thats around 1400

you really want to tell me a plus 1400 doesnt play hopechess???

do you really think a 1400 plays chess and does really good move that lets a thinking and knowledgeable player lose without making cross blunders???

i do not think so

Panzer division

gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen,

you all seem to be blowing in a windstorm - and picking it with each other. back all your thin claims of patzerdom and its related rating with some substance. we all know that there are unions/agencies out there that call someone at 2200 a master. now, what's below that ? for some of you guys to say a patzer still can reside at 2300-2400 is....oh heavens why am i writing this right now ? the only thing i can go on is Colby's groundbreaking book attempting to DEFINE patzer. Yes, there's A, B, C, etc. players per USCF. And for some reason patzer is a dirty word. and Colby says a lettered player IS a patzer (or the elevated grandpatzer). U know what ? patzer is a dirty word - ive just decided. I should know - i am one.

and remember - when a industry's committee (USCF, FIDE) decides to title at 2200 there's something behind that - isn't there ? trust they've had mucho experience about this. And they DO control the # of masters. That what governing bodies do. RE: those that can play - do. those that can't govern. and those that can do neither float around in patzerdom hoping - and starting posts - like me !  

FIDE doesn't title at 2200 - Candidate Master, while technically a title, really means that the player is close to becoming a master.  Think of CM in FIDE as being similar to Expert in USCF (obviously CM in FIDE is harder to achieve than Expert in USCF, but the analogy is not about difficulty, it's about having a status a rung below master).

ofc there are always exceptions but to me, even though i might never reach 2000, let alone anything above even if i train for years.

from the moment a person reaches 2400 he is considered a chessplayer. everything below is a patzer.

maybe i read not enough chess books, but also think that as far as i can remember and i probably just read to few chess books (do forgot about what im writing here if im incorrect), that people had to have at least IM title to be mentioned in books by name and are otherwise only referred to as NN (unless they were famous ofc)!!!

and re: the industry controls the cutoff rating for true cheesplayers. My guess is they're thinking there needs to be real natural talent for the game to be considered a master or higher. So, ppl can practice til and still will never make master - they just simply do not 'see' the board's key points each move within the time control. And I'm beginning to think they've got it right. A player should be upheld for possessing a natural talent for the game 

The term "patzer" reminds us all that we suck at chess. Compared to Houdini 3, we're all patzers.

well you know if you take at industry controls, that are actually not the cut off. the industry has a monetary interest to have more people in that pool, for monetary purpouses.

also if you look at other professions that if you call someone a master in anything.

what is a master who doesnt compete internationally. its not my definition of mastership. Maybe the universal definition of mastership is different.

a sushi master for example is universally recognized. if you want a sushi master working in your country. you have to pay him good and beg him to come, because his high status.

if someone is recognized as a true master in karate he is probably having to test himself against the best.

how can there be a non international masteR?

that is just hilarious that a non international is considered master.

at least in my opinion.

ok never mind you win, i give up.

chess gg considering that chess is a niche sport, a niche market and we have already over 2500 International masters and hundreds of GMs. I believe  we have enough idols.

look at soccer, i believe much fewer soccer players are well respected than there are international masters or grandmaster.

that said, in other sports the requirements are probably way higher to be universally accepted.

I think its only reasonable to call everything under international master  a patzer.

but that is just my opinion.

ok when i see kids game you are joking ofc.

but honestly when i see a national master charge 5 dollars for a game whatever the outcome may be (not 5 dollars if he wins). i see national masters charge 100 dollar per game.

do you really think its unfair to be critical? also saying the time put in to become as strong should be valued, i dont think so, what comes on the chess board needs to be valued. No need to pay incompetence.

why pay a lousy painter, just because the majority is made of worse painters? that is logical con artistery.

the former  russians even considered IMs patzers i think. that was too harsh, but i believe IM is a good cut off of what constitutes are patzer and whats not a patzer.

Silman for comparison is an IM. As a said an IM is a nonpatzer.

well lets see it that way, if you take a game by non ims, say candidate master for example. show it to a player above 2400, dont tell him who played that game. ím pretty sure in majority of cases they will  consider the games the epitome of patzerism.

1800

To Magnus Carlsen, Gata Kamsky is a patzer.