Do you mean FIDE titles or ECF ones?David Blower wrote:BTW how many titles are there and what is the rank of the titles and what ratings do you have to get to get them?
What would you pay for a title?
Re: What would you pay for a title?
Re: What would you pay for a title?
This is the ECF system:-
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/membersh ... ts-system/
and this is the FIDE system:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_titles
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/membersh ... ts-system/
and this is the FIDE system:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_titles
-
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:27 pm
Re: What would you pay for a title?
The only ones that matter are FIDE's IM and GM. The former indicates you know something about the game. The latter that you've acquired some proficiency at it. There must be well over 2000 IMs today and well over a 1000 GMs. The titles lend a bit of credibility if you want to author a chess book or offer chess lessons. Otherwise I don't see any tangible benefit to them. An Oxbridge degree, on the other hand, opens doors that otherwise remain obdurately locked.David Blower wrote:BTW how many titles are there and what is the rank of the titles and what ratings do you have to get to get them?
-
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:36 pm
Re: What would you pay for a title?
Fide give the impression that they are trying to create that confusion:NickFaulks wrote:I don't imagine that anyone will confuse these with real titles.
"FIDE titles for the lower rated players
FIDE announces official titles for the lower rated players. The titles of Arena Grand Master (AGM), Arena International Master (AIM), Arena FIDE Master (AFM) and Arena Candidate Master (ACM) are automatic titles which can be achieved in FIDE Online Arena, but being official FIDE titles can also be used in over the board games as well."
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... w-era.html
-
- Posts: 4552
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: What would you pay for a title?
Arshad >The only ones that matter are FIDE's IM and GM. The former indicates you know something about the game. The latter that you've acquired some proficiency at it. There must be well over 2000 IMs today and well over a 1000 GMs. <
According to Nigel Short, the titles don't matter at all. He moved sharply away when I pointed out they are one of the fuels that make chess tournaments run.
An assertion:
FM title is equivalent to a first degree.
IM about a Masters degree.
GM title is higher than a Ph.D. After all, there are less than 2000 of them from a chess population of, it is claimed, 600 million.
WGM is a little strange.
I wanted to introduce an Elite GM title, but was thwarted in this.
You can use the chess titles to get financially advantageous coaching posts.
For many they lend validity to your pursuit of the game for so many years.
Yes, there may be a measure of vanity, So what? I introduced the International Candidate Master title in FIDE to get the title myself. What good does it do? Well, sometimes children ask me whether I am a grandmaster. I might just as well be, from their viewpoint. I respond, 'No I am a Candidate master.' If about 12 they think for a moment and then nod in understanding.
Tell somebody I am rated 2070 or graded 175 and that can only be understood by somebody who knows a great deal about chess.
David Blower has not had his question answered competely. I am also an International Arbiter and an International Organiser. There are also coaching, correspondence chess and problem solving titles. And possibly some I have forgotten about.
According to Nigel Short, the titles don't matter at all. He moved sharply away when I pointed out they are one of the fuels that make chess tournaments run.
An assertion:
FM title is equivalent to a first degree.
IM about a Masters degree.
GM title is higher than a Ph.D. After all, there are less than 2000 of them from a chess population of, it is claimed, 600 million.
WGM is a little strange.
I wanted to introduce an Elite GM title, but was thwarted in this.
You can use the chess titles to get financially advantageous coaching posts.
For many they lend validity to your pursuit of the game for so many years.
Yes, there may be a measure of vanity, So what? I introduced the International Candidate Master title in FIDE to get the title myself. What good does it do? Well, sometimes children ask me whether I am a grandmaster. I might just as well be, from their viewpoint. I respond, 'No I am a Candidate master.' If about 12 they think for a moment and then nod in understanding.
Tell somebody I am rated 2070 or graded 175 and that can only be understood by somebody who knows a great deal about chess.
David Blower has not had his question answered competely. I am also an International Arbiter and an International Organiser. There are also coaching, correspondence chess and problem solving titles. And possibly some I have forgotten about.
-
- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm
Re: What would you pay for a title?
I can't believe Nigel has forgotten his old arch rival Tony Miles. His GM title was worth an immediate £5,000, which was a lot of money in those days. Probably about the average annual salary of a teacher in those days.Stewart Reuben wrote:According to Nigel Short, the titles don't matter at all.
Aren't titles the main motivation for the Hungarian "First Saturday" tournaments? About 10 years ago a fellow club member, upon reaching retirement, started having serious chess coaching in preparation to go off and play in one of these tournaments. He was going to get his IM title, so he kept telling us. Well, he did go and play eventually and his rating went up about 200 points over the course of a couple of years but now he is more or less back to where he wasStewart Reuben wrote:He moved sharply away when I pointed out they are one of the fuels that make chess tournaments run.
Refreshing honesty!Stewart Reuben wrote:Yes, there may be a measure of vanity, So what? I introduced the International Candidate Master title in FIDE to get the title myself.
FA and IA are two of the more achievable, rewarding titles for chess lovers. Like a football referee at a Manchester derby you get the best seats in the house. At a lower level you get to spy on your rivals. Something it's not so easy to do when you have your own game to play at the same time. If a stronger player has a similar repertoire you get to watch him in action and learn. If you miss a few moves you can always check his scoresheet when he nips of to the toilet or to get a coffee. You will often see moves and plans that you haven't seen before, although they're not always guaranteed to be soundStewart Reuben wrote:I am also an International Arbiter.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.
-
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:27 pm
Re: What would you pay for a title?
At Short's level, the GM title becomes almost irrelevant. It's like a PhD for a Nobel prizewinner in physics or economics -- it's taken for granted that the winner or serious candidate will have one. I'm reminded of the story told about Korchnoi and Gufeld -- when Gufeld acquired the GM title he (allegedly) went up to Korchnoi and said, "Now we are colleagues." Korchnoi's rejoinder was to point at another weak GM and say to Gufeld, "No, you are a colleague of his."Stewart Reuben wrote:According to Nigel Short, the titles don't matter at all. He moved sharply away when I pointed out they are one of the fuels that make chess tournaments run.
These things do matter. If you're a 2350 player, achieving a 2400+ rating in enough tournaments to acquire an IM title adds to your market value as a coach and writer. Likewise if you're a 2450 player and are pursuing a GM title. These days, on the back covers of chess books, the author's peak rating is often given. I admit I take a writer whose peak rating has been 2650 more seriously than one whose peak has been 2525.You can use the chess titles to get financially advantageous coaching posts.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: What would you pay for a title?
The man who Korchnoi compared with Gufeld was supposedly the late Yugoslav/Croatian GM Damjanovic - who would be considered a lesser GM even today, never mind by the rather more exacting standards of the 1960s/70s.
There were actually a few rather average GMs in the Eastern bloc "satellites" back then - whilst some much stronger Soviet players struggled to get even an IM title. I suppose that is what comes from such unbelievable nonsense as USSR championships with multiple world champions not even being eligible for title norms (said piece of silliness was rescinded too late for several people who deserved better)
There were actually a few rather average GMs in the Eastern bloc "satellites" back then - whilst some much stronger Soviet players struggled to get even an IM title. I suppose that is what comes from such unbelievable nonsense as USSR championships with multiple world champions not even being eligible for title norms (said piece of silliness was rescinded too late for several people who deserved better)
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 4552
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: What would you pay for a title?
There is more to the Damjanovic story.
Later Eddie Gufeld noticed that Korchnoi had drawn with the Yugoslav. So he wrote to Korchnoi saying, @Aha, now I see you are a GM like Damjanovic.'
One of the reasons there was a low percentage of Soviet GMs was because the state prevented players travelling. The Qualification Commission recommended to the General Assembly that it should be possible to gain title norms in national championships, even though there were an inadequate number of foreigners. Immediately I learnt of this change in the 1980s, I informed Scotland. They were a prime beneficiary of this new rule. Ray Keene was a member of the QC at the time, as probably was Kevin O'Connell.
Don't for one moment think today's GMs are weaker than those of yesteryear. There are far more of them because it is much easier to travel; it is much easier to become a stronger player because of the information availability; the regulations are more user friendly; there has been a tremendous growth in Swisses where it is possible to get a GM norm. I have been shown statistics that show the rise in ratings is exactly what you might expect for a normally developing society.
Nick Faulks is secretary of the QC and I am sure he will confirm that many GMs got the title through horse-trading in the past. e.g. Pravin Thipsay was awarded the GM title on the grounds that it would be good for Asian chess. I know because it was my suggestion. None of that is true today. There are 'lollipop' titles through the zonals. But they don't exist in Europe and don't bestow any GM titles, only IM or below.
Later Eddie Gufeld noticed that Korchnoi had drawn with the Yugoslav. So he wrote to Korchnoi saying, @Aha, now I see you are a GM like Damjanovic.'
One of the reasons there was a low percentage of Soviet GMs was because the state prevented players travelling. The Qualification Commission recommended to the General Assembly that it should be possible to gain title norms in national championships, even though there were an inadequate number of foreigners. Immediately I learnt of this change in the 1980s, I informed Scotland. They were a prime beneficiary of this new rule. Ray Keene was a member of the QC at the time, as probably was Kevin O'Connell.
Don't for one moment think today's GMs are weaker than those of yesteryear. There are far more of them because it is much easier to travel; it is much easier to become a stronger player because of the information availability; the regulations are more user friendly; there has been a tremendous growth in Swisses where it is possible to get a GM norm. I have been shown statistics that show the rise in ratings is exactly what you might expect for a normally developing society.
Nick Faulks is secretary of the QC and I am sure he will confirm that many GMs got the title through horse-trading in the past. e.g. Pravin Thipsay was awarded the GM title on the grounds that it would be good for Asian chess. I know because it was my suggestion. None of that is true today. There are 'lollipop' titles through the zonals. But they don't exist in Europe and don't bestow any GM titles, only IM or below.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: What would you pay for a title?
I certainly recall reading that the late Filipino GM Balinas got his title on "good for chess in Asia" grounds, despite his rather low rating.
(not surprisingly, a certain compatriot called Campomanes had a big hand there)
He could certainly play a bit though, I remember the opening game of an Informator (mid 70s) when he absolutely dismantled Larsen with Black.
(not surprisingly, a certain compatriot called Campomanes had a big hand there)
He could certainly play a bit though, I remember the opening game of an Informator (mid 70s) when he absolutely dismantled Larsen with Black.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am
Re: What would you pay for a title?
Matt Mackenzie wrote:I certainly recall reading that the late Filipino GM Balinas got his title on "good for chess in Asia" grounds, despite his rather low rating.
(not surprisingly, a certain compatriot called Campomanes had a big hand there)
He could certainly play a bit though, I remember the opening game of an Informator (mid 70s) when he absolutely dismantled Larsen with Black.
-
- Posts: 8838
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
- Location: London
Re: What would you pay for a title?
A great game to play through. Thanks for posting that, Paolo. The way White's b2 bishop was sidelined for most of the game and how the a4 knight never moved again was very instructive.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: What would you pay for a title?
Though he did miss a mate in one - as I hope everybody who looked at the game has noticed
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 1356
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am
Re: What would you pay for a title?
34..Qxg3(mate)
-
- Posts: 442
- Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:01 pm
Re: What would you pay for a title?
You know what, I might be tempted to pay the ECF the £10 for team master though!David Blower wrote:It still does. The link is here: http://www.englishchess.org.uk/membersh ... ts-system/David Robertson wrote:
And the ECF? Didn't it used to award the title of Chess Maestro.
An ECF grade of 95 is needed (at any point in your life) which means I am a chess maestro (although I haven't bothered to pay the ECF the £10 so I guess I might not be a chess maestro officially. Nevertheless I have qualified via my grade to be one.)
In general I don't think titles should be brought, but earned. I consider myself to be a chess maestro as I have done everything (apart from pay the ECF £10 to earn it.) Nevertheless I don't actually use the title but if anyone asks me: "are you a titled chess player?" I can honestly answer: "yes" to the question.