Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:22:44 07/15/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 1998 at 09:30:00, Shaun Graham wrote: >On July 14, 1998 at 22:08:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 14, 1998 at 19:46:35, Shaun Graham wrote: >> >>>On July 14, 1998 at 10:43:27, Don Dailey wrote: >>> >>>>On July 13, 1998 at 11:57:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 13, 1998 at 10:30:31, Shaun Graham wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>PS #2! :) >>>>>> >>>>>>You don't have to defeat GM's to qaulify for the title, you simply have to >>>>>>perform at a certain level in events of a certain category. In swiss system >>>>>>tournaments fritz could get paired against almost all 2300-2400 opponents, >>>>>>defeat them and have a performance well over 2500 ELO. This isn't even taking >>>>>>into consideration, the 1 out of 4 tourneys where fritz would defeat someone of >>>>>>the calliber of GM Kotronias. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Sorry, but this is mistaken. You have to play in a tournament of a known >>>>>"category" and produce a result >= X where X varies based on the category >>>>>of the tournament. And it *guarantees* that you are going to have to play >>>>>and beat GM's to get the required 3 GM norms... Or you are going to have to >>>>>roll over a *bunch* of IM players which is just as good. >>>> >>>>Hi Shaun, >>>> >>>>I think Bob is more correct on this one. The problem is that if you >>>>continue to beat up on weaker players, then you are virtually guaranteed >>>>some pairings with stronger players. I don't think these tournaments >>>>have very many weaker players anyway. But if you can "roll over" these >>>>weaker players consistantly, then you probably are playing at grandmaster >>>>strength. I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely, perhaps impossible to get >>>>a GM norm without hanging with the Grandmasters. >>> >>>Sorry i never said that you wouldn't play any titled players. What i said is >>>that you could play a number of 2300-2450 players and beat them, this would give >>>you the necessary performance rating, you might play a GM, doesn't mean you are >>>going to lose, after all fritz did beat GM Kotronias a game in this match, if >>>you extrapolated a bit on that data, you could posit that fritz would beat a GM >>>1 in every 4 tournaments, thus giving rather good possibilities of getting a >>>norm. Further you have 5 years to acquire the norm, in that time period (less >>>most likely) you would have achieved those norms. >>>> >>>>- Don >> >> >>Does anyone have "FIDE Rules of Chess" lying around? Mine grew legs and >>walked a few years ago. But I don't believe you can get a GM norm in a >>tournament with *no* GM players participating. There are other things that >>go into a tournament's "category", including average rating, but number of >>players and lowest rating also plays a part. I just don't have the book around >>any longer, but someone can probably solve this part of the argument... > > >Well this isn't really part of the arguement, especially, because as mentioned >in the above Fritz-player would be expected to beat some GMs. Not by me. in a 40/2 game it would be luck to beat one every 10 games.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.