Should We Introduce GM Lite Title in Chess?

kamalakanta
RoaringPawn wrote:
kamalakanta wrote:
MagnetsCarleson wrote:
kamalakanta wrote:

I WAS a National Master...not anymore!.....and the Polish GM who beat me in Iceland made me feel like a patzer!

 

 

Once you get the NM title, you can never lose it.

I did not know that....

Once a Master, always a Master! so Kamalakanta, you were born a Master twice!

Call me "Shahib"!

MagnetsCarleson
RoaringPawn wrote:
kamalakanta wrote:
MagnetsCarleson wrote:
kamalakanta wrote:

I WAS a National Master...not anymore!.....and the Polish GM who beat me in Iceland made me feel like a patzer!

 

 

Once you get the NM title, you can never lose it.

I did not know that....

Once a Master, always a Master! so Kamalakanta, you were born a Master twice!

Yep!

RoaringPawn
kamalakanta wrote:
RoaringPawn wrote:
jsaepuru wrote:

Now note how numerous the early grandmasters were.

Up to 1960 including, the new grandmasters were:

  1. 1951 - 2
  2. 1952 - 6
  3.  

total - 38

The GM inflation was already going on in 1950s. Was it a bug or a feature?

Thanks for the research really.

It definitely become a serious bug once ELO was introduced. When was it, do you know?

 

Early 70'S?

Checked online, adopted by FIDE in 1970

jsaepuru
RoaringPawn kirjutas:
jsaepuru wrote:

Now note how numerous the early grandmasters were.

Thanks for the research really.

It definitely become a serious bug once ELO was introduced. When was it, do you know?

Elö Arpad published first rating list in 1961, but it was USCF only.

First unofficial list of non-US players was in 1967. First official Fide list was in 1971.

The Fide website posts ratings only since 2000. As for the earlier ratings, I now find a blog:

http://fidelists.blogspot.com/2008/01/january-1971-fide-rating-list.html

Looking at the number of players simultaneously rated 2600 or more, at the first list of the year:

  1. 1971 - 16
  2. 1972 - 14
  3. 1973 - 15
  4. 1974 - 18
  5. 1975 - 18
  6. 1976 - 13
  7. 1977 - 12
  8. 1978 - 12
  9. 1979 - 15
  10. 1980 - 14
  11. 1981 - 15
  12. 1982 - 15
  13. 1983 - 13
  14. 1984 - 16
  15. 1985 - 12
  16. 1986 - 14
  17. 1987 - 13
  18. 1988 - 18
  19. 1989 - 28

As you see - there was no Elo inflation from 1971 to 1988. Having had Elo of 2600 or more by 1988 means something.

nidor01

I thought Carlsen and Caruana were referred to as Super Grandmasters.

RoaringPawn
nidor01 wrote:

I thought Carlsen and Caruana were referred to as Super Grandmasters.

That's true @nidor01

English isn't my native tongue, but I feel that Grand is already the top of the scale in English.

So any prefix doesn'r sound right for my, admit it, non-English ear. Chances are I'm mistaken.

The only prefix I can think of is Grand itself, like in Grand Grand Momhappy.png

 

kamalakanta

We will see "Super-Duper GM" soon......

Chessiship

NOOOOOO.

kamalakanta, that is just silly.

More like Mega GM's.

ghost_of_pushwood

Actually, I do keep misplacing mine...

Caesar49bc

I don't think we need a super GM title. The top 100 list is sufficient.

Betwen the ease of learning compared to decades ago, and the population explosion of humans over the last 40 years, I suspect the per capita of GM's per 100,000 players would look reasonable, especially when compared to the population of Earth.

It looks like humans have little chance of beating the top chess engines in a match, to use that as a reference marker.

kamalakanta
Chessiship wrote:

NOOOOOO.

kamalakanta, that is just silly.

More like Mega GM's.

 

Silly is good!

(I grew up watching The 3 Stooges, and curly was my favorite!)

Caesar49bc

The English language loves superlatives. Americans use them all the time to enhance a point they're making.

I suspects the roots for that go back to 19th century when traveling shows, circuses, and vaudville shows used superlatives to drum up the crowd's excitement.

The announcer, formally known as the "MC" or Master of Ceremony, needed to be just as entertaining as the rest of the performers on the show.

ghost_of_pushwood

That was the most brilliant post I've ever seen! grin.png

jsaepuru
jsaepuru kirjutas:
RoaringPawn kirjutas:
jsaepuru wrote:

Now note how numerous the early grandmasters were.

Thanks for the research really.

It definitely become a serious bug once ELO was introduced. When was it, do you know?

Elö Arpad published first rating list in 1961, but it was USCF only.

First unofficial list of non-US players was in 1967. First official Fide list was in 1971.

The Fide website posts ratings only since 2000. As for the earlier ratings, I now find a blog:

http://fidelists.blogspot.com/2008/01/january-1971-fide-rating-list.html

Looking at the number of players simultaneously rated 2600 or more, at the first list of the year:

  1. 1971 - 16
  2. 1972 - 14

As you see - there was no Elo inflation from 1971 to 1988. Having had Elo of 2600 or more by 1988 means something.

The 16 people who had Elo of 2600 or more in January 1971 were:

  1. Fischer 2760
  2. Spassky 2690
  3. Korchnoi 2670
  4. Larsen 2660
  5. Petrosian 2640
  6. Polugaevsky 2640
  7. Botvinnik 2630
  8. Portisch 2630
  9. Smyslov 2620
  10. Tal 2620
  11. Geller 2615
  12. Keres 2615
  13. Hort 2605
  14. Stein 2605
  15. Gligoric 2600
  16. Taimanov 2600

In January 1972 list, the 14 included only 1 newcomer: Karpov 2630 (in 1971 had been 2540)

In January 1973, the newcomers were Byrne 2605, and Huebner 2600

In January 1974, the newcomers were Kavalek 2625, Mecking 2615, Ljubojevic 2605, Kuzmin 2600, Smejkal 2600

In January 1975 - no newcomers

January 1976 - again no newcomers who were not in the previous 24

January 1977 - still no newcomers

January 1978 - Romanishin 2605.

Note how the 24 masters who had 2600 by 1974 had no newcomers before 1 came in 1978...

 

SpiderUnicorn
blueemu wrote:
jsaepuru wrote:

I would support some form of great-grandmaster title.

But then we might need great-great-grandmasters, and perhaps even great-great-great-grandmasters.

we got great-grandparents wink.png

kamalakanta

We could have MBY Grandmasters, or BIC Grandmasters (Much Better than You, and Beat me If you Can).........

Tylarc

Look at it like a blackbelt in martial arts. 
There's black belts at your local gym who have been training many years and just go to a few tournaments here and there but definately have earnt the title. 


Then there's competitive black belts on the world circuits who are levels above your everyday black belts

ghost_of_pushwood

God, how I hate everyday black belts!