Definition of Super Grandmaster

[Ian Thompson]

The problem is that there were about 30 "official" grandmasters announced by FIDE about 65 years ago (although the term was in use before), this grew over the years, until it reached 1500 or so recently. This is too many really, ...

One measure of how many there "ought to be" is how many Grandmasters a non-chess player thinks there are. Most people know that good players are called Grandmasters. When I've asked non-players how many there are the answer is usually "about 100", and they are very surprised when I tell them there are well over 1000.

[NickFaulks]

the game has gone through a population explosion and an information explosion, so there should be many more players of that standard now than there were in 1950.

Information explosion unquestionably, not so sure about the population explosion.

[Joshua Gibbs]

the game has gone through a population explosion and an information explosion, so there should be many more players of that standard now than there were in 1950.

Information explosion unquestionably, not so sure about the population explosion.

I think Jack means that more and more people are playing FIDE rated chess, using "population" in a statistical sense?

[IM Jack Rudd]

More and more people are playing FIDE rated chess, and certain countries have emerged in a big way. (I suspect a 1950 version of the Isle of Man Masters would not have had 28 players from India, for example.)

[NickFaulks]

More and more people are playing FIDE rated chess

That is certainly the case, but there is no reason why that should lead to an increase in numbers of GM standard players. They have always played FIDE rated chess.

[Brian Towers]

More and more people are playing FIDE rated chess

That is certainly the case, but there is no reason why that should lead to an increase in numbers of GM standard players. They have always played FIDE rated chess.

Bit of a non sequitur there, Nick. "GM standard players" do not appear magically out of nowhere and suddenly start playing FIDE rated chess. Rather they start off well below GM standard and an important part of becoming GM standard is playing FIDE rated chess.

[Andrew Bak]

I'd like to see a title for players that have qualified for the Candidates at some point in their career. These players are the real creme-de-la-creme and typically demonstrate consistent performance at a high level. Having this method for awarding the title also has the benefit of removing any arguments relating to inflation of ratings as the raw number doesn't matter at all, but your standing in comparison to your peers is the deciding factor.

[Paul Cooksey]

I think candidate itself does that job, now it is part of the cycle again. If you say "8 times candidate Lajos Portisch" it acknowledges his greatness without diminishing the GM title.

But even so the GM to candidate Elo range is quite wide, 300 points ignoring outliers wheres lesser titles typically 100.

[NickFaulks]

Bit of a non sequitur there, Nick. "GM standard players" do not appear magically out of nowhere and suddenly start playing FIDE rated chess. Rather they start off well below GM standard and an important part of becoming GM standard is playing FIDE rated chess.

No, the important thing is to play chess against opponents who know what they are doing. Whether those games are submitted for FIDE rating is of less importance, and whether games between weaker players are also reported because the rating floor has been lowered to 1000 is of no importance at all.

[Stewart Reuben]

JOSHUA. I was not comparing Honorary titles with properly obtained GM titles. Take a look at some of the idiotic FIDE honorary GM titles.

[Joshua Gibbs]

JOSHUA. I was not comparing Honorary titles with properly obtained GM titles. Take a look at some of the idiotic FIDE honorary GM titles.

You were comparing a PHD with the GM title though? i think a GM title is many times more valuable!

[Matt Mackenzie]

JOSHUA. I was not comparing Honorary titles with properly obtained GM titles. Take a look at some of the idiotic FIDE honorary GM titles.

Which ones are you thinking of as "idiotic" there? I would say most were fairly well merited.

Indeed, there is an argument a few more could have been handed out to former USSR players at least.....

[NickFaulks]

Here is the list of Honorary Grandmasters, per Wiki. It may be controversial, since I believe that Penrose's title, for instance, was clearly intended not to be "honorary", even though it was awarded in that manner.

1977 - Julio Bolbochán, Esteban Canal, Borislav Milić, Carlos Torre Repetto
1981 - Arnold Denker
1982 - Lodewijk Prins, Raúl Sanguinetti
1983 - Vladimir Alatortsev, Alexander Konstantinopolsky, Erik Lundin
1984 - Eero Böök, Stojan Puc
1985 - Harry Golombek, Mario Monticelli, Jaroslav Šajtar
1986 - Arthur Dake, Theodor Ghiţescu
1987 - Vladimir Makogonov, Vladas Mikėnas, Bogdan Śliwa
1988 - George Koltanowski
1990 - Andrija Fuderer, Rudolf Marić
1991 - Dragoljub Minić
1992 - Heinz Lehmann, Rudolf Teschner
1993 - Jonathan Penrose
1996 - Károly Honfi, Enrico Paoli
1999 - Péter Dely
2003 - Elmārs Zemgalis

Some of these are a little strange. To quote a case well known in Britain, and I have absolutely no wish to to dishonour the memory of Harry Golombek, who was a fine player, well worth his IM title ( which meant a lot in those days ) and had he somehow been born fifty years later would probably have made the GM title with ease, this honorary title does look a bit political.

[Matt Mackenzie]

I would say over half of those were clearly deserved.

Some are dubious, but that is also true of the "regular" GM title. All did rather more to earn it than Alexandru Crisan

[Brian Towers]

The last one was in 2003 so maybe FIDE are discontinuing the idea? We'll know soon enough if they decide to give Mark Dvoretsky an honourary GM or not. He is probably more worthy of the title than most of the people on that list.