Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:30:20 06/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2001 at 15:19:45, Albert Silver wrote: >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 It is possible to use only the last 10 years for this statistics and to avoid these problems. Uri
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.