Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hiarcs' GM norm?

Author: Dadi Jonsson

Date: 03:56:03 08/02/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 02, 2002 at 05:18:36, Sune Larsson wrote:

>On August 01, 2002 at 23:15:14, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On August 01, 2002 at 11:47:35, GuyHaworth wrote:
>>
>>>Did Hiarcs do enough to earn a GM norm, had it been carbon rather than silicon?
>
>>>
>>
>>No idea.  I thought that a GM norm was equivalent to a 2600+ performance
>>rating...   Could be wrong there however.
>
>
>  You are correct here Bob. This is one of the basic criterias for making
>  a GM norm. And this is strictly calculated. Some months ago IM Berg
>  played a a swiss in Hamburg. The situation before the last round was that
>  a draw would give him a performance of 2594. This was not enough for a
>  GM norm. He had to play for a win (lost it by the way) to make this
>  2600+ performance.
>
>  Sune

There are two possibilities. A GM norm can be based either on the old category
system or the performance of the player (since 1998). In the latter case a
player may choose to include or exclude his own rating from the calculation of
the tournament average. In addition it seems that the "performance-method" is
only allowed in Swiss (as in Berg's case), Scheveningen or Team Tournaments.
Unfortunately the handbook at the FIDE-site (www.fide.com Yes, it's up again)
has not been updated for a long time, but if someone is interested I believe
that the latest version is available on some European sites (I have a link
somewhere).



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.