Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:39:32 06/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2001 at 08:26:06, Mark Young wrote:
>I. Counties with the highest GM ratings, Regardless of GM population.
>
>II. China has the highest GM Average at 2591.11 with only 9 Grandmasters
>
>No country in the world has GM rating average higher then 2500-2599 elo range,
>not even a new chess country like China that has no "old grandmasters".
>
>Some in this forum want to cherry pick data, or build straw dog arguments to try
>and reconstruct what a average Grandmaster is, but the data still does not
>support their position.
>
>Still I will do the work for them. Since they are too busy, and Cherry Pick the
>worst case for our position on what should be considered an average Grandmaster
>to determian if computers are now playing at Grandmaster strength.
>
>Since computers are playing over 2600 Elo, and the best GM average any country
>can muster is 2591.11 elo (still in the 2500 elo range) I still must consider
>the best computers as playing GM strength.
>
>Even under the worst cass Cherry picked data.
>
> Country Average rating GM's Number of GM's
>1 China 2591.11 9
>2 Ireland 2588.00 1
>3 Moldova 2586.00 3
>4 India 2584.00 5
>5 Bosnia & Herz. 2583.20 5
>6 Estonia 2577.50 2
>7 Belgium 2577.00 4
>8 Brazil 2571.17 6
>9 Armenia 2558.08 12
>10 Netherlands 2556.33 12
>11 Philippines 2551.33 3
>12 Denmark 2550.86 7
Nice post Mark,
Here are some points on the "age" discrimination issue.
1. GM title is awarded for life.
2. If a GM has a rating, it was because he/she earned it by playing
and was capable of playing when he/she earned it.
3. Psychology (my field of expertise, see profile) says that a person
is in mental peak between 25 and 35 (Erickson, Levinson, Stanstrock),
However any individual may continue at peak performance until the day
they die, many do.
4. I am not sure wich GM's you are going to classify as "no longer" GM at the
age of say 40 (traditional middle age) or older.
5. A GM is a GM regardless of age. There is no age limit.
6. Strength is measured by ELO not age.
7. Comparing ELO makes sense, comparing age does not.
8. I am not sure how many people would like to be told they are over the hill
at 40, I do not, and results matter, not age.
I did a a few averages using FIDE "Flag" for all the GM's:
1. For all GM's the avg rating was 2521, n=746
2. For GM's with "i" flag avg rating was 2461, n=43
3. For GM's with "n" flag avg rating was 2511, n=9
4. For GM's with no flag avg rating was 2525, n=694
I find the age factor not important for me. I enjoy GM games of all ages and
value results over age. I am surprised that the argument use to be (yesterday)
that any GM was above the "2100" program, now the argument is only GM's in a
certain age range can perform better than the programs. What is next, exclude
based on some other discriminating factor? The only factor important to me is
results and progrms are performing in Top 100 of all FIDE rated players
regardless of age:
ex: 100 Najer, Evgeniy g RUS 2600
Programs on 500Mhz average well above all the GM average of 2521. Programs on
866Mhz and higher perform above the 2600 mark. Performance is the key. The IM
arguments have not data to support them and I am not here to just make people
happy, however, everyone is entitled to an opinion, I am entitled to mine. :)
Best Regards,
Chris Carson
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.