I'm not as smart as I was in my 30s. I should surrender my Ph.D.
Is FIDE Corrupt?
Sort:
Ziryab wrote:
I'm not as smart as I was in my 30s. I should surrender my Ph.D.
Why?
Aug 15, 2017
0
#24
Spiridonov is 79 years old and still actively playing. Of course his rating is relatively low in regards to his peer group.
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
I'm just an amateur?
I'm near 1200 in Blitz. An expert rating should be enough to have an opinion on these things. Educate yourself: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-curious-case-of-1200-the-expert-s-rating
Do I know what norms are? Please don't insult me, I know all about norms.
1200 is not an expert rating, it is "I got my feet a bit wet" rating. 
MayCaesar wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
I'm just an amateur?
I'm near 1200 in Blitz. An expert rating should be enough to have an opinion on these things. Educate yourself: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-curious-case-of-1200-the-expert-s-rating
Do I know what norms are? Please don't insult me, I know all about norms.
1200 is not an expert rating, it is "I got my feet a bit wet" rating.
1200 is "the expert's rating". I've written about it extensively. It's now almost universally accepted as the expert's rating. There's no need to challenge reality.
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
MayCaesar wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
I'm just an amateur?
I'm near 1200 in Blitz. An expert rating should be enough to have an opinion on these things. Educate yourself: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-curious-case-of-1200-the-expert-s-rating
Do I know what norms are? Please don't insult me, I know all about norms.
1200 is not an expert rating, it is "I got my feet a bit wet" rating.
1200 is "the expert's rating". I've written about it extensively. It's now almost universally accepted as the expert's rating. There's no need to challenge reality.
How can that be the expert rating when the midpoint rating where the most players collect is around 1500? It just doesn't add up. By the way, you can criticize me all you want for being under BOTH of those ratings. I am just here to contribute my thoughts.
If once you were a GM and then slip, but retain your title for life, would that explain the ratings?
I assume you already took that into account, but I wasn't complete sure, so sorry if I'm incorrect here!
I assume you already took that into account, but I wasn't complete sure, so sorry if I'm incorrect here!
Ashmage wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
MayCaesar wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
I'm just an amateur?
I'm near 1200 in Blitz. An expert rating should be enough to have an opinion on these things. Educate yourself: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/the-curious-case-of-1200-the-expert-s-rating
Do I know what norms are? Please don't insult me, I know all about norms.
1200 is not an expert rating, it is "I got my feet a bit wet" rating.
1200 is "the expert's rating". I've written about it extensively. It's now almost universally accepted as the expert's rating. There's no need to challenge reality.
How can that be the expert rating when the midpoint rating where the most players collect is around 1500? It just doesn't add up. By the way, you can criticize me all you want for being under BOTH of those ratings. I am just here to contribute my thoughts.
Please do elaborate. I have done extensive work, and research on the subject. But would love to read your point of view, as I have not seen somebody take such an extreme view on the subject like yours in the past.
Yes, it is.
That's why you should join the noble cause of the FDE.
That's why you should join the noble cause of the FDE.
Yes, fide is corrupt and that is killing chess
Regarding maintaining standards: Joe Flacco had one good playoff run and is a Superbowl Champ. No matter how bad he or his team is now, nobody can take that away from him. (Sadly...(I'm a Steelers fan...))
I think that 1200 is the Expert Rating, people just haven't accepted it yet...
Fennifer wrote:
What isn't corrupt these days?
These days!!!!! And days gone by and the days yet to come.
pfren wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 έγραψε:
DeiMasta wrote:
Some of the ratings on that list are pathetic! Grand masters? more like getsbeatalot masters
Doesn't it just anger you?
Nikola Spiridonov's dad must be the FIDE president or something.
Really?
I happen to know GM Nikola Spiridonov. He is labelled as "FIDE" because the Bulgarian Chess Federation is expelled from FIDE and ECU, simply because the FIDE puppets have issues with their president, Silvio Danailov.
And did you notice that Nikola is eighty years old, and it would be rather unlikley being rated at 2500+?
Other than that, you could find it useful reading the actual title requirements, so you would possibly not come to stupid assumptions. They are here: https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=198&view=article
It doesn't have anything to do with age. It's about performance. NIkola Spiridonov no longer plays at a GM level and therefore should not be considered a GM. It devalues the title.
Dec 24, 2017
0
#38
I am in agreement with the majority of posters, the GM title is an accomplishment earned. It is only natural that as we age our performance deteriorates in every area. Surgeons who retire are still referred to as Doctor, and as others have pointed out, although they may no longer be active in their professions they still retain the titles from the degrees they EARNED in university: PhD, MSc, DDS etc.
It appears you are titling at windmills with this argument. All the best for a happy holiday.
Dec 24, 2017
0
#39
" I posted a thrilling thread discussing exactly how easy is it to become a GM. "
And yet your rating is still around 1200. In your posts you often tell us you know "exactly" things where you obviously haven't done your homework and haven't bothered to learn the whole story. Getting a 2500 rating has NEVER, N-E-V-E-R been the sole criteria for a GM title.
So WHY are you claiming it to be so? You said you had a "assumption." And then you continue as if that assumption must be true! Remember that if you ASS/U/me you often make U into something!
This is like assuming you win a medal if you finish an Olympic race, then call the organizers corrupt when only 1st, 2nd, and 3rd get medals!
Kirsan is definitely one of the bad guys, he claims to be a Buddhist but supplies money for Syria to buy weapons of mass destruction that were used to kill people and was sanctioned by the U.S. for it http://en.chessbase.com/post/us-sanctions-against-fide-president
He also seems schizophrenic, says he will resign one day, then takes it back the next, creates "fake news" about it in the Russian press. Now he has essentially been removed from power by FIDE and a guy named Georgios Makropoulos is acting in his stead until elections in 2018 https://www.chess.com/news/view/ilyumzhinov-loses-even-more-power-as-fide-president-3728