NM is harder to get than WCM.
is this fair
Sort:
CraigIreland wrote:
Are you concerned that you don't qualify for a WCM title or that the title exists at all? Is it just Chess that concerns you or are you concerned about women's categories in other events too?
this is the classic tail of biases and gender issues within the chess world which has been argued over many times for many decades. are the women titles unfair? in my opinion yes they are as they aren't real titles as i think of them as degrading to female players as it just makes things look underserved and only for the purpose of poaching more females to the game. i think really it only makes them look weaker and degrading, i find the titles offensive to them as i really do respect and admire so many female players but the women titles themselves are just not good
Rookside_Castling wrote:
binomine wrote:
Rookside_Castling wrote:
binomine wrote:
joseph7505 wrote:
I am saying it is unfair because they only need 2000 and all they have to do is woman tournaments
I'm saying its fair.
Are you shooting for or striving for the WCM? Do you even play well enough to get a WCM? Does someone else earning a WCM harm you in any way?
If the answer is no to all these questions, then your complaints are simply sour grapes.
the main reason is that they just have it easier than others. I'll probably get decent enough for either title, but i'd have to work harder to get CM cuz i can't get WCM (which is easier to get).
An NM is easier than both, why not try for that first, and then get back with me.
NM is harder to get...
2200 is more than 2000, right?
yes
binomine wrote:
joseph7505 wrote:
I am saying it is unfair because they only need 2000 and all they have to do is woman tournaments
I'm saying its fair.
Are you shooting for or striving for the WCM? Do you even play well enough to get a WCM? Does someone else earning a WCM harm you in any way?
If the answer is no to all these questions, then your complaints are simply sour grapes.
do you think its fair for normal players to work harder? to achieve something more biased and way weaker without much work in comparison? like whats in your head, of course when someone becomes easily 2000 FIDE or qualified for a women title they wont get it as they are male but they will obviously be annoyed that female players get a reward while they don't
i dont really have an opinion on this but here's a fun fact
for some reason there are a million loopholes to get the woman titles, like i've played a wcm otb who was 1800
i've also seen wcm's' who are rated like 1400
Aug 7, 2022
0
#27
neatgreatfire wrote:
i dont really have an opinion on this but here's a fun fact
for some reason there are a million loopholes to get the woman titles, like i've played a wcm otb who was 1800
i've also seen wcm's' who are rated like 1400
That also applied to IM and GMs as well. I am not going to name names, but there's an IM on this site that is rated 1200 on chess.com.
You can get an IM for winning certain junior tournaments, and not all junior tournaments are created equal.
#41 you're totally right, but on the bright side everyone knows WCM is a weaker title than CM. And women who don't believe in gender stereotypes should only play in Open tournaments
Rookside_Castling wrote:
MelvinGarvey wrote:
TheNumberTwenty a écrit :
Flamewars and gender politics aside, the reason they do this is not really because women are "burdened by more chores" or whatever, it's simply to entice more stronger female players to keep playing. In the US I believe only 8 percent of USCF rated players are female, so it makes sense to give them an extra bone to go for.
"burdened by more chores" is an outrageous shortcut to describe the female condition in most of human history and world society.
What I described in my post, and not completely, by far, is an attempt to explain, again, since you missed that very fundamental part, the dramatic and otherwise unexplained drop in numbers of female players when kids reach puberty.
This massive drop and the reasons to it are in the center of the question: what is to be done in order to try compensate and make chess in competition attractive again to those who, seemingly, lost taste to it?
The FIDE gave us their reply in form of Women's titles and other such things, will you agree with what they do or not, you surely have got just plain nothing at all to offer for solutions not only to this one problem, but to just any problem there is in the World and in Human society.
Shortcuts and dumb mockery may flatter your ego and make you feel some witty, but it doesn't help the real question at all. Just like your existence btw.
Chores may be a reason, but not the main reason. There aren’t many girls who play chess, so why would one go out of their way unless they enjoy it that much (to be uncomfortable). Then, when they grow up, there are even less, and the chores you talk about show up. But even without chores there would be less women than men playing, simply because of how the game has been for so long. But what your post didn’t address was that even at the age of, for instance, 10 (before puberty), there are a considerable amount less girls than boys who play chess.
if I were a woman and a big fan of chess..... I might not get married 
ConfusedGhoul wrote:
#41 you're totally right, but on the bright side everyone knows WCM is a weaker title than CM. And women who don't believe in gender stereotypes should only play in Open tournaments
agreed
Rookside_Castling wrote:
NMs need to be at least 2200 to get their titles and after that can never drop below 2000. So no, you are wrong, it just applies to women's titles.
i think this is wrong, NM's have to be OVER 2200 or right at 2200 but after they cross the barrier they hold that title for life regardless if they go under 2000 and the same thing applies with FIDE titles as whenever your a FM, CM, IM, even GM you will never lose that title despite rating loss
i don't think they lose their title, they keep it even if they lose their 2200 rating
Rookside_Castling wrote:
Kowarenai wrote:
i don't think they lose their title, they keep it even if they lose their 2200 rating
i know
but the floor is 2000, so they can't go below 2000 even if they tried.
wait so your saying USCF chess will prevent NM's from going below 2000? thats nuts
Aug 7, 2022
0
#34
Kowarenai wrote:
Rookside_Castling wrote:
Kowarenai wrote:
i don't think they lose their title, they keep it even if they lose their 2200 rating
i know
but the floor is 2000, so they can't go below 2000 even if they tried.
wait so your saying USCF chess will prevent NM's from going below 2000? thats nuts
breh
I am saying it is unfair because they only need 2000 and all they have to do is woman tournaments
I'm saying its fair.
Are you shooting for or striving for the WCM? Do you even play well enough to get a WCM? Does someone else earning a WCM harm you in any way?
If the answer is no to all these questions, then your complaints are simply sour grapes.
the main reason is that they just have it easier than others. I'll probably get decent enough for either title, but i'd have to work harder to get CM cuz i can't get WCM (which is easier to get).
An NM is easier than both, why not try for that first, and then get back with me.