Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Think 2500 is too low a standard to be GM status for computers?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:45:48 06/18/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 18, 2001 at 05:04:49, Bill Gletsos wrote:

>On June 17, 2001 at 21:00:25, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On June 17, 2001 at 19:00:14, Chris Carson wrote:
>>
>>>On June 17, 2001 at 15:55:50, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 17, 2001 at 14:20:17, Mark Young wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>For those who think the 2500+ standard is too low a standard, here is the list
>>>>>of grandamsters in the top 1000 below 2500 elo. As you see there are many below
>>>>>2500 elo. The 2500+ elo standard is a good benchmark to be considered GM
>>>>>strength status for computers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You are missing the point:
>>>>
>>>>The FIDE GM requirements address two points:
>>>>
>>>>1.  consistent play.  You must maintain a 2500+ rating while you work on
>>>>the second requirement.  If you drop below 2500, you can't earn the GM
>>>>title.  Once you have been awarded the title, you _can_ then drop below
>>>>2500.  Several GMs have done this, particularly older ones.
>>>>
>>>>2.  Strong play.  You must complete three GM norms.  You must play in a
>>>>tournament with a strong enough field to qualify for a GM norm, and you
>>>>must produce a performance rating for each of these events of 2600 or
>>>>above.
>>>>
>>>>The idea is that you will have consistently played at a GM-rating-level, and
>>>>that you will have also played in three tough events and produced a rating of
>>>>2600+ for each of those events.  The thinking is that if you can produce three
>>>>2600+ events, _and_ keep your rating over 2500, then you probably _are_ a GM
>>>>and not just a "blinding flash and deafening report" that will disappear real
>>>>quick.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Two GM norms (3 are not requred, 2600+).  2500+ for 24 games (30 if no round
>>>robin).  Events must be 80% FIDE rated players, 50% FIDE titled, and have a
>>>minimum of 3 GM's.
>>
>>
>>Has this changed?  I was at the Marshal Chess Club when everybody was buzzing
>>because (then) IM Maurice Ashley had just gotten his _third_ GM norm...
>>
>>
>Bob,
>It has always been 2 norms but it is not as simple as Chris would imply.
>There is no requirement for a 2500+ rating for 24 games but a 2600 performance
>over 24 games.


OK... that makes more sense.  So to paraphrase:  A 2600 performance over
24 games, which must be spread over two events but can be spread over more.
IE 3 8-round events with a performance rating of 2600 over all three
events?

Since 12+ round events are rare, this probably explains the "3rd GM norm
buzz I heard in NYC".




>A player is required to score two or more norms over 24 games plus attain a
>rating of 2500 within 7 years of his first GM norm.
>For example if a player scores a GM norm in a 12 round round robin and another
>GM norm in a 12 round Swiss and the players rating reaches 2500 any time within
>7 yeras of his first GM norm then he earns the GM title. However If he earns a
>GM norm in 8 round round robin and a GM norm in a 10 round swiss the player
>needs to earn another GM norm in a tournament of at least 6 rounds to gain the
>GM title.
>
>Essentially its trying to prove that the player attained a 2600 performance
>rating over 24 games although its not worded in those terms.
>
>For the majority of players they cannot earn the GM title with just 2 norms
>because they cant get the 24 game requirement in 2 title tournaments so it takes
>them usually 3 GM norms over 3 tournaments plus of course the 2500 rating
>requirement to gain the GM title.
>
>
>Bill
>


Thanks. That explains my confusion...

Bob



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.