Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: "Effectively" Comp GM strength question is answered!

Author: Walter Koroljow

Date: 15:19:55 07/16/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 16, 2000 at 14:56:54, Baldomero Garcia, Jr. wrote:

>On July 15, 2000 at 06:59:21, Walter Koroljow wrote:
>
>>On July 15, 2000 at 01:35:24, Baldomero Garcia, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>Speaking of what "GM strength" means, I think we look at it from today's
>>>perspective.  It is no secret that it is far easier to get the GM title
>>>today than it was say 10 or 20 years ago (notice that I didn't say it was
>>>easy, I said easier).  I remember GM Browne saying that the year he got
>>>his GM title, only one other player got it: Karpov.  In those days, the
>>>GMs were pretty close to being "world championship contenders".  Today,
>>>someone getting a GM title is still far away from being considered a world
>>>championship contender.
>>>
>>>Baldo
>>
>>Before 1950, no one had run a four-minute mile.  Today, it is nothing special
>>and many people do it. Is it easier to do?  I think so.
>>
>>But the people doing it have to run just as fast as they had to before 1950.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Walter
>
>The analogy is not quite identical.  There is the issue of rating inflation,
>which would make it easier to get a GM norm and maitain the required minimum
>rating.  Comparing that to your analogy, it would be like making the mile
>a little shorter.
>
>Baldo

Absolutely.  This is a possibility.  My point is that rating inflation is not
the only explanation for what we see.  What the proportion of the two is (and
inflation could even be negative) is hard to settle in a post!

Walter



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.