Dominic Lawson

[Ian Thompson]

Obviously club chess players and upward have a strong sense of who is exactly how good, and players at the ECF 165 / FIDE 1950 have few illusions that they are masters...! But to the general public, and to casual players who basically just know the moves, a player in the 165-180 bracket probably does look pretty much like an 'expert'.

The ECF call players with grades of 120 and above 'Masters' - http://www.englishchess.org.uk/membersh ... ts-system/.

[AustinElliott]

Obviously club chess players and upward have a strong sense of who is exactly how good, and players at the ECF 165 / FIDE 1950 have few illusions that they are masters...! But to the general public, and to casual players who basically just know the moves, a player in the 165-180 bracket probably does look pretty much like an 'expert'.

The ECF call players with grades of 120 and above 'Masters' - http://www.englishchess.org.uk/membersh ... ts-system/.

Goodness. Didn't know that. Seems a little.... Well... unhelpful, somehow.

[JustinHorton]

So we should cut non-chess players who describe players like Healy as 'chess experts', or similar, some slack.

Well, maybe, but you'd want to ask what people understand by "master", wouldn't you? And you'd want to say to them, look, this guy was at best an average club player - is that what you understood he was when you heard him described as a master?

The film Barbaric Genius makes the specific claim that "during his chess career John won ten international chess tournaments" and its trailer says he won "10 major British chess titles in 5 years". I don't think these are remotely defensible claims.

[JustinHadi]

Compared to the average person on the street a person with a grade of 120 for all intents and purposes is a chess master. Unless all their mates happen to be titled players.

[IM Jack Rudd]

Compared to the average person on the street a person with a grade of 120 for all intents and purposes is a chess master. Unless all their mates happen to be titled players.

Similarly, compared to the average person on the street, a person who plays football in the Conference is for all intents and purposes an expert footballer. Do we ever use the term to describe such a person?

[JustinHadi]

No, because expert footballers (say professional level) are ubiquitous. True expert chess players are almost completely invisible due to a dearth of proper marketing of chess by ... amongst others the ECF board members.

[Stewart Reuben]

Children often asked me whether I am a grandmaster. From their viewpoint I might just as well be. My response is, 'No, I am an International Candidate Master.' 12 year olds think for a bit and nod their head in understanding. I am also a US Master when I am a member. But that conveys the idea of my status much less well.
I was asked in about 1965 whether I was in the top 0.1% of chessplayers. I hesitated. My boss then said, 'I mean of all chessplayers.' I responded immediately, 'Of course'.
How about I am approximately equivalent of a Third Division footballer?

[Ian Thompson]

How about I am approximately equivalent of a Third Division footballer?

No, because people under a certain age won't have a clue what the Third Division was.

How about you're good enough to play for your County 1st team. (I assume you probably are, without checking.)

For me, that there are 5 regional chess unions in England and I'm good enough to have won the West of England Championship.

Twenty years ago, people could also reasonably convey their standard of play by saying they were good enough to play in the British Championship, but that obviously doesn't work any more.

[Stewart Reuben]

Oops. That really shows my age. What is it now called?

[IM Jack Rudd]

Oops. That really shows my age. What is it now called?

League One.

[JustinHorton]

Although it's often colloquially referred to as the third tier, not least by people like me who think that "League One" is a ludicrous name for the third division.

Similarly, "master" is a ludicrous term for somebody of the standard of John Healy. Or me, for that matter, and I'm a much better player than he ever was.

[Richard Bates]

Oops. That really shows my age. What is it now called?

League One.

Either way you've pitched yourself way too high IMO.

[Nick Burrows]

Say about 150 English players in the Premier league + 20 per club in the 2nd & 3rd tiers - 20 X 48 = 960.

150 + 960 = 1110 players at a very rough approximation.

Is Stewart in the top 1110 English chess players?

The database ranks him at 926

[Stewart Reuben]

I was ambiguous in my use of tenses. I was referring to my playing strength in 1964-5. That was higher than it is today. My highest rating was 2270 and grade about 205.

I introduced the low master titles for English chess as a marketing ploy. It was a direct imitation of the EBU. Their hierarchy of master levels was highly successful in popularising regulated tournament play in bridge. The effect for the ECF was negligible because, I think, the grading/rating systems give a very good idea of relative playing strength. The EBU has now moved to a grading system and may well find that their master point system diminishes in effectiveness.

I did suggest FIDE introduce the term 'international expert', level 2000+. But there was no enthusiasm for that.

[Paul Habershon]

I agree that the English Bridge Union has ludicrously inflated nomenclature for their Master Point rankings. However, I don't think the excellent new grading system (NGS) has really caught on yet. At chess, grades are much more 'in your face' because of the one-to-one nature of the game. Indeed chess grades actually matter in the rules of many team events, e.g. local leagues. Bridge team matches do not have lists showing gradings or even Master Point ranks. Even at bridge congresses now they continue to judge 'non-expert' prizes by Master Points rather than grades, which are 2 (lowest) up to Ace of Spades. Only the Aces are divided into the four suits. It may surprise some that individuals are graded, but the system factors in strength of partner as well as strength of 'field', i.e. opposition average strength. The system cannot accurately cope with individual grades for players who play exclusively with each other. It likes 'diffusion'.

I am glad that one of the bridge players on the committee which initiated the NGS was Peter Lee (only person to have won British Chess Championship and bridge Gold Cup) whose profession is statistics. Huge credibility for the system there. As you can imagine, many bridge players don't like it.