Chess - Play & Learn


FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store


Why did they pick 2200 to be a chessmaster?

  • #21
    IWriteCodeGeniusBoy wrote:

    If i were u... i wouldnt worry about it LMFAO. Im probably one of the few in this forum who will realistically reach that level.


    Keep your head down and stfu

    You may become a chess master, but it would serve you better in life if you became a master of civility and humility.  Try working on that.

  • #22

    Arpad Elo devised the rating system for FIDE. In his testing, masters nearly always showed results at or above 2200. But that wasn't set by him; it was set by the national federations who used his system or a similar scale, like USCF. FIDE set the FIDE Master title at over 2300. IM & GM titles didn't have rating requirements until years later - it was based on your score against IMs & GMs in tournaments (what we now call a "norm"); the rating limit was put in later.

  • #23

     Sounds like it is just one of those things that evolved.  I know that the USCF has periodically made adjustments to the rating formula.  Several years ago, my rating suddenly increased over 100 points without my having played a rated game.  I was told that it was the result of the USCF's having modified the rating formula to make the distribution curve more bell shaped.

  • #24

    Here's an excerpt that I came across a few years ago.  I don't have the link to the article.

    The United States Chess Federation’s Elo rating system assigns to every tournament chess
    player a numerical rating based on his or her past performance in USCF rated tournaments.
    A rating is a number between 0 and 3000, which estimates the player’s chess ability. The Elo
    system took the number 2000 as the upper level for the strong amateur or club player and
    arranged the other categories above and below, as shown in the table below.

  • #25

    As I recall, when the Elo system was unveiled in the pages of Chess Review in the form of a ratings list of best US players, 2300 was master category. 2700 was GM.

    Shortly afterwards, the catagories were dropped 100 ponts.

    Now master was 2200.

    Also a presupposition of the sytem was that an equal score in the US Open was what a 2000 would be achieving.

  • #26

    Actually you are wrong: You have to remember that at least for the USCF there is a 200 pt spread between classes. Thus 1400 - 1599 = Class C; 1600 - 1799 = Class B; 1800 - 1999 = Class A; 2000 - 2199 = Expert; and TA DA 2200 + = Master. Now the awarding of titles is based upon acquiring a set of "Norms". It is possible to be a National Master at 2200 but NOT be a FIDE Master. Generally speaking if you are a National Master the probability that you will have achieved all the Norms necessary to become a FIDE IM will have been achieved by the time you reached 2300, and there are a number of IGM who have a rating less than 2700

  • #27
    fryedk wrote:

    Is there anything special about 2200 that they consider that rating to be "master" strength? Why not 2100 or 2300?

    First, the titles nowadays are a recognition of achievement in results.

    Originally (late 1800s), it was the same way but the bar was pretty high: They had to win or get an excellent result in a tournament mostly filled with masters.

    And that was the only title available by achievement in results. Grandmasters were those who were believed to have a decent chance of success against the World Champion, and players could only get that title if other GMs agreed on the quality of the candidate's play. Therefore, there were just a few Grandmasters and everybody else was a master.

    You can imagine, under current ELO, that most below 2700s would only have the Master title, and hardly anyone below 2500s, because they would have been asked for a 1st–4th place in a tournament filled with +2600s.

    But then came FIDE.

    They took control after Alekhine's death and began the system of norms for GM titles (although the first group of GMs were granted by a FIDE Congress decision). As several national federations already titled their national champions as masters or national masters, FIDE came up with the International Master title. Which wasn't easy to achieve either.

    By the 70s, if my memory serves me well, they included a minimum ELO rating requirement for the titles, 2400 (IM) and 2500 (GM). Which were really high, as few to none were above 2600s.

    But, then again, something happened.

    By the 80s and 90s, there was an increase in the number of players because more tournaments were held. For instance, it was noticed that most people having a national master title, across the world, were about 2200s in the 50s–60s. Today, it's hard to imagine a national champion anywhere with just 2200. Therefore FIDE came up with the idea of FIDE Master, which is "automatically" awarded by exceeding the 2300. More people to the mix, FIDE came with the Candidate Master title, setting the "automatic" bar at 2200. In time, they may come with Prospect for Candidate Master, or something with a better ring.

    And why the quotation marks on "automatic". Well, you have to pay "some" Euros to FIDE before you get the title wink.png


  • #28

    2200 isn't Master.  Master is whatever my rating is at a given time. =P


    Just kidding.  In all seriousness, I don't know.  For USCF ratings, they go in 200 point increments.  1800-1999, you're an A rank.  1600-1799, you're a B.  It was probably arbitrary once Master was established at 2200. 


Online Now