FIDE title hierarchy?

[Eric Gardiner]

I have been following the English Women's Championships which are taking place in my area. Generally In FIDE rated events, FIDE titles of players (presumably the titles with highest status) are displayed in the results and pairings. As women are eligible for more titles than men, I was wondering what the relative status of all FIDE titles is. For example, does WIM rank above CM (both usually require reaching a rating of over 2200)? And does WCM rank above AGM (both usually require reaching a rating of over 2000 but the second is from online play) ?

Thanks to anyone who can provide an explanation or link to answer my question.

[NickFaulks]

Thanks to anyone who can provide an explanation or link to answer my question.

WIM is most certainly superior to CM, since the primary requirement is three norm results, with the minimum rating as an ancillary. For some purposes WIM is superior to FM, which has a higher rating requirement but can be gained with no norms.

AGM and similar online titles have no status in OTB play.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Good question. When I got the FIDE Arbiter title, I asked Stewart Reuben whether that took priority over my CM title. He said playing titles should take priority over non-playing titles, which sound reasonable. I would think titles available to all should take priority over titles only available to one group, so female players tend to use IM rather than WGM. Some even refuse the "W" titles.

I have been at tournaments where players have had AIM or AGM by their names on the results chart. In the latter case, someone asked if this player went to lots of meetings! I agree with Nick that the "A" titles should not be mentioned at a conventional tournament.

After all, strong postal players who play normal chess at a lower level don't have GM by their names. For example, Nigel Povah is a CC GM and a conventional chess IM. He appears as IM in conventional tournaments.

[Eric Gardiner]

AGM and similar online titles have no status in OTB play.

They do appear to have some status as in the competition I alluded to there is an AFM whose title is displayed. I've noticed a sprinkling of AGM, AIM and AFM titles displayed in other OTB FIDE rated competitions. I'm conjecturing from your reply that WCM would rank above AGM so that WCM would be displayed for a player with both of these titles.

[NickFaulks]

WCM would be displayed for a player with both of these titles.

I realise that I do not understand exactly what you are asking. Displayed where?

[Eric Gardiner]

WCM would be displayed for a player with both of these titles.

I realise that I do not understand exactly what you are asking. Displayed where?

In the list of entrants or pairings, e.g.

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx?lan=1

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx ... =4&flag=30

[NickFaulks]

In the list of entrants or pairings, e.g.

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx?lan=1

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx ... =4&flag=30

Thanks, I guessed you were probably referring to Chess-Results. The simple answer is that they can put anything they like, it has no practical significance and I think they just copy the information provided by tournament organisers.

The only place where the choice of title matters at all is on a norm certificate. That is the question I answered originally.

[David Sedgwick]

WCM would be displayed for a player with both of these titles.

I realise that I do not understand exactly what you are asking. Displayed where?

In the list of entrants or pairings, e.g.

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx?lan=1

http://chess-results.com/tnr467011.aspx ... =4&flag=30

Swiss Manager / Chess-Results do indeed show the online titles. I simply ignore them.

I would say that the hierarchy is GM; IM; WGM; FM; WIM; CM; WFM; WCM

As Nick says, there are some purposes for which it would be appropriate to reverse the order of FM and WIM.

[Alex Holowczak]

They do appear to have some status as in the competition I alluded to there is an AFM whose title is displayed. I've noticed a sprinkling of AGM, AIM and AFM titles displayed in other OTB FIDE rated competitions.

If you import players one-by-one in Swiss-Manager, then you pull the FIDE titles down with it, so the Arena titles appear.

I use a bulk process for tournaments I'm involved in, and the data gets loaded separately. The Arena titles don't come with it. Given that the FIDE Online Arena project appears to have been abandoned, it will be interesting to see what happens to these titles.

[John McKenna]

Good question. When I got the FIDE Arbiter title, I asked Stewart Reuben whether that took priority over my CM title. He said playing titles should take priority over non-playing titles, which sound reasonable. I would think titles available to all should take priority over titles only available to one group, so female players tend to use IM rather than WGM. Some even refuse the "W" titles.

I have been at tournaments where players have had AIM or AGM by their names on the results chart. In the latter case, someone asked if this player went to lots of meetings! I agree with Nick that the "A" titles should not be mentioned at a conventional tournament.

After all, strong postal players who play normal chess at a lower level don't have GM by their names. For example, Nigel Povah is a CC GM and a conventional chess IM. He appears as IM in conventional tournaments.

Do you not think those 'A' titles gained online might just indicate a propensity to 'fiddle' a bit?

I know of one or two who have such titles and their otb play and consequent grade&/rating is nowhere near the level required to get the 'A' titles playing online.

A similar situation may have applied regarding 'correspondence' chess for some time - I know of an otb player no better than about 150 (ECF grade) who attained a rating of 2400 plus, and a master title to boot, in postal play.

Not saying these things can't be done without becoming a 'centaur', but listen out for the horse whispers.

[Tim Spanton]

You seem to be under the misapprehension that engines are not allowed in correspondence play. While this may be the case at some sites, it is certainly not so with the Fide-recognised ICCF.

https://beauchess.blogspot.com/

[John McKenna]

Thanks for pointing that out, Tim.

However, the postal-play instance I referred to is an historical one. The achievement took place in an "arena' and at a time when, I think, the use of 'engines' was still not allowed.

I could be wrong about that as I never pursued it beyond face value.

Those 'A' titles, on the other hand, are not supposed to be achieved with 'engine' assistance, so how do you account for those who cannot string a few good moves together otb with getting online titles that others struggle to attain even though graded/rated much higher (170/1900, for example)?

The thing I'm getting at here is that a dubious online player may decide to 'port' his fiddling skills to otb, and so prefer not to 'publicise'' his 'A' title when competing face to face.

Facing X-graded players was warning enough - before the X-category was abolished (by whom and for why, I know not). How 'A' titles are attained seems to me to be another, more dubious, kettle of fish.

[Paul McKeown]

A similar situation may have applied regarding 'correspondence' chess for some time - I know of an otb player no better than about 150 (ECF grade) who attained a rating of 2400 plus, and a master title to boot, in postal play.

I was at university with a player who was graded 120 or 130 otb. He has been a correspondence grandmaster for twenty odd years now; professionally he is engaged with research employing supercomputers.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"A similar situation may have applied regarding 'correspondence' chess for some time - I know of an otb player no better than about 150 (ECF grade) who attained a rating of 2400 plus, and a master title to boot, in postal play."

In fairness they might have worked hard! I lost 2-0 at CC to a 125 OTB some 30 years ago. When I congratulated him on his victories, he explained that he spent at least 3 hours per move on each game and made very deep notes, and generally replied the same day. I got home from work, maybe after a chess or table-tennis match, and tried to fit several CC games into one evening during the week. Naturally, the quality suffered.

[Matt Mackenzie]

There were people who were very strong correspondence players, but ordinary if not weak OTB, even in the pre-computer days.