Author: Albert Silver
Date: 12:19:45 06/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2001 at 15:04:21, Uri Blass wrote:
>On June 18, 2001 at 14:37:04, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>On June 18, 2001 at 14:23:25, Peter Fendrich wrote:
>>
>>>On June 18, 2001 at 13:41:25, Mark Young wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 18, 2001 at 12:42:01, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On June 18, 2001 at 08:21:54, Jouni Uski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Here in Finland we have 3 GMs. Here's from their ratings from fide:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>500011 Yrjola, Jouni g 2419 2 24.10.1959
>>>>>>500020 Westerinen, Heikki M.J. g 2412 10 27.4.1944
>>>>>>500038 Rantanen, Yrjo A. g 2327 0 23.4.1950
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You can give computer a knight handicap to get interesting match...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jouni
>>>>
>>>>Quoted from Bob's post:
>>>>
>>>>"So picking a bunch of GMs with ratings of 2400 and then saying "hey, computers
>>>>are this good, so..." doesn't make much sense. Because at _some_ point in time,
>>>>those 2400 GM players were 2600+ GM players, otherwise they would not have
>>>>gotten the title..."
>>>>
>>>>You are Dead Wrong again Bob, we will take the 3 Grandmasters from the previous
>>>>post for example. Not one of these Grandmasters was ever close to 2600 elo and
>>>>in fact only one of these grandmasters was able to best 2500+ elo. As usual in
>>>>this argument your theory falls apart in the light of FACTS.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yrjola, Jouni GM
>>>>best elo 2515, 1984
>>>>
>>>>Westerinen, Heikki M.J. GM
>>>>best elo 2485, 1976
>>>>
>>>>Rantanen, Yrjo A. GM
>>>>best elo 2460, 1979
>>>
>>>FIDE had a "Central Committee Meeting" at Oosterbeek in Sept 1975.
>>>At that meeting they changed the regulations for awarding IM and GM titles.
>>>They approved a proposition to add rating requirement to title norms (2400 and
>>>2500 respectively for IM and GM titles).
>>
>>Correct, and this was good move by FIDE. As it is much harder to achieve a 2500+
>>elo rating the make TPR's for Grandmaster status.
>
>Do you have a statistics that proves it.
>
>Here is a way to check if you are right that the 2500+ is much harder
>
>take all the humans that achieved one of the following:
>1)GM norms in 2 or 3 tournaments with at least 24 games
>2)Rating of at least 2500
>
>I am interested to know how many of them achieved 1 first or only 1 and how many
>of them achieved 2 first or only 2.
>
>For this discussion humans who achieved their first rating of more than 2500
>based on their tournament when they got the last GM norm are considered as
>humans who achieved both targets at the same time
>
>Uri
Let's also not forget that at that time, having a 2600+ rating put you as a
super GM (similar to the ~2700 GMs of today), and that at that time, the
international rating system was still in its infancy, so it worked with a MUCH
smaller pool of players. There was a time when getting a 2700 rating was
something akin to being a god (in chess), and until 1989 more or less, the only
players to have reached it were all world champions. Now it is considered a
select 'club' of players.
Albert
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.