lageon wrote:
does that mean women need to be at least 1400 to became a WGM or something..
Yes.
what is diffrence between WGM and GM.
Sort:
1500
Yeah, better to ask your parents than to find it out on the forum.
If any woman on here reaches a Chess.com rating of 1550, Chess.com will then notify FIDE, and they will be awarded the title of WGM.
Kinda funny seeing someone as weak as him trashing the accomplishments of WGMs.
Me or the OP?
You.
cool, i'll apply.
and FIDE capitalized on it to get more monies.
i actually agree with the underlying point there, the idea of female-only titles is quite silly for a game such as chess. inb4 massive debate over differences between men and women
noleryer wrote:
It means feminists wanted a title just for women because there are only like 5 women who could become a real GM.
What feminists wanted this?
noleryer wrote:
All of them.
Source?
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
and FIDE capitalized on it to get more monies.
i actually agree with the underlying point there, the idea of female-only titles is quite silly for a game such as chess. inb4 massive debate over differences between men and women
There have been a few epic ones already. Boils down to marketing at the cost of sexism. Both the suggested idea that women are weaker and that men aren't eligible for certain tournaments, prizes, fame, and titles.
Oh, and some statistics usually brought up:
Women average lower than men's with the caveat of limited data.
Supposedly greater ratio of titled women players to all women players than similar stat for men.
Also supposedly men have greater frequency of outliers on both sides of the bell curve.
Jul 7, 2013
0
#15
The OP does have a point. Why should the top 5% of women be held to a different standard than the top 5% of men.....in a game like chess?
Grinmaster wrote:
The OP does have a point. Why should the top 5% of women be held to a different standard than the top 5% of men.....in a game like chess?
I agree, but that has already been discussed to death.
waffllemaster wrote:
LoveYouSoMuch wrote:
and FIDE capitalized on it to get more monies.
i actually agree with the underlying point there, the idea of female-only titles is quite silly for a game such as chess. inb4 massive debate over differences between men and women
There have been a few epic ones already. Boils down to marketing at the cost of sexism. Both the suggested idea that women are weaker and that men aren't eligible for certain tournaments, prizes, fame, and titles.
Oh, and some statistics usually brought up:
Women average lower than men's with the caveat of limited data.
Supposedly greater ratio of titled women players to all women players than similar stat for men.
Also supposedly men have greater frequency of outliers on both sides of the bell curve.
lol, i see ~ thank you :P
Jul 7, 2013
0
#18
noleryer wrote:
I dont think 5% of chess players are GMs
You are right about that. I guess my point is....why should women be held to a different standard at all in chess?
Jul 7, 2013
0
#19
Crabiano wrote:
I think it is silly that the women's world champion is automatically awarded the title of GM, when there is not necessarily anything to suggest that they play at GM strength.
For example, cannot mate with bishop and knight...
How many times have male gm's failed to mate with bishop and knight? Bet no one's tracking that.
Confirmation bias.
does that mean women need to be at least 1400 to became a WGM or something..