Author: Howard Exner
Date: 04:56:10 07/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 1998 at 22:19:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 14, 1998 at 04:22:50, Howard Exner wrote: > >>On July 13, 1998 at 09:42:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >> >>>last time I looked, a GM *had* to have a rating over 2500. And we are talking >>>about "IGM" vs "GM" here I assume, since GM is a USCF term, while IGM is a title >>>awarded by FIDE after achieving 3 GM norms in three separate tournaments, plus >>>maintaining a 2500 rating. >> >>Do they have to maintain the 2500 rating? I thought once a GM always a GM. >> >>Also, "GM being a USCF term" has me confused a bit. Is it possible then to be >>a GM on the USCF rating list and not to be listed as a IGM on the FIDE list? > >Yes. FIDE awards "International Master" and "International GrandMaster" >titles. Local federations award "non-international" titles like GM. In >the USCF, for example, you simply trip either 2500 or 2550 (don't remember >which) to get the GM title. USCF has >2200 = Master, >2400 (or 2450) = >Senior Master, and then GrandMaster. So a USCF GM does not have to go through the rigors of the three norms? In Canada it's different. Our few GM's are "FIDE only GMs". Is there an example of a USA player who calls himself a GM but does not have the FIDE sanctioned title? > >In the USCF, once you break 2200, you become a "life master" even if you drop >below 2200 later. I don't know about the other titles however... > >However, I hope we don't consider "old GM" players in the Fritz argument, >because I *know* Fritz can beat Botvinnik. The game goes "1. e4 <time forfeit> >since he won't be able to make a move. :) > >I'm talking about "active GM" players that are still "GM" strength. Playing >an 80 year old GM that is now rated 2300 won't do much toward a GM norm... Yes "GM" can be a difference of 500 rating points between the low and high end. Being granted the title of GM will never be bestowed upon a computer by FIDE. Even the mighty Deep Blue, although clearly of GM playing strength, cannot be officially caled a GM. I think performing consistently around the 2500 TPR would be a good indicator of GM strength. This of course would require a data pool of 40/2 games vs humans. One other indicator of computer strength besides the usual (ie: analysis of game quality, testimony of strong players, games results at long time controls) is the trend (if such a trend exists) of GM's owning and playing or sparring with software. It would seem that if the computer chess market is opening up to the chess elite, then they must view the calibre of computer play as being somehow "worthy". Any inside info by anyone who knows whether GM's are buying software for the purposes of sparring? I know alot of them play on the net against the computer but this at the blitz control.
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.