< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Nov-22-03|| ||jaime gallegos: Unfortunately the ELO system must be replaced because of higher rates create inflation on everyone, remember what happened with the Myanmar players |
|Nov-22-03|| ||PizzatheHut: <remember what happened with the Myanmar players> jaime gallegos, could you explain what happened with the Myanmar players? I'm not familiar with that. |
|Nov-23-03|| ||Bears092: I know nothing about it, but I would assume it has something to do with getting inflated ratings by playing a lot of weak competition for a long time. |
|Nov-23-03|| ||waddayaplay: Eggman: The original purpose of the GM-title comes to mind - being awarded by the russian chess federation (i think) to the truely most celebrated players in the world at that time, a very small crowd like Nimzowitsch, Tartakower, Capablanca, Lasker, Alekhine and a couple other top-performers. |
|Nov-23-03|| ||ughaibu: Waddayaplay: After the tournament at Saint Petersburg 1914 the five players who'd qualified for the second stage (Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Tarrasch and Marshall) were given the title "grandmaster" by Czar Nicholas. However somebody recently posted that the term had been in use during the 19th century. About ratings: I dont understand why people take them so seriously, they provide a rough guide that's all, they certainly dont objectively quantify strength. |
|Nov-29-03|| ||Eggman: Chessgames.com, surely making Brynell the player of the day again when you did so about a week ago is an oversight? |
|Nov-29-03|| ||chessgames.com: It's random. |
|Nov-29-03|| ||shadowmaster: <Myanmar players> As close as I can remember, there was an accusation that the Myanmar chess federation manipulated the ratings of its players. The result was that FIDE deducted 100 points from all Myanmar players over 2100. People noticed something was wrong when Myanmar's top players were rated over 2600 for no justifiable reason. |
|Mar-30-04|| ||Cyphelium: I find this discussion about introducing a new title a bit off the mark. The situation which you people don't like is 2460 players being GM:s, when they really are far behind the World's elite. Fair enough. Ok, let's say we introduce a new title, call it Super-GM. We'll give it to players rated above 2700. In 10 years some of them will no doubt have slipped down to lower ratings. If we had made people Super-GM:s some years ago it would for example have included Loek van Wely, but he wouldn't qualify now. So the same will happen, people will start to say -"What, is this guy a super GM, but he's only 2590??" Ok, so then we'll have to introduce the Mega-Super-GM title to distinguish between all the lowly and unworthy Super-GM:s and those Super-GM:s that really count. Then in another 15-20 years....|
The point is that titles are awarded for a life-time for good achievements. Ratings will _hopefully_ show who belongs to the elite at any given movement. The two shouldn't be mixed too much. Or so I think anway.
I visited the FIDE homepage. Old V. Smyslov is currently rated at 2495, yet he is GM. He doesn't by far belong to the elite. But he does deserve the title anyway, don't you think? =)
|Aug-09-04|| ||BishopBerkeley: One possible "Super GM" style system:
Well, here's one possible solution. The Grandmaster title has clearly become a relative title, and maybe that's OK. It's still a very impressive achievement.
But what is needed is a positional designation, restricted to some specific number of the top-rated players in the world.
How about this scheme:
The #1 rated male player in the world would receive the title:
"King of Chess"
The #1 rated female player in the world would be the
"Queen of Chess"
The next two players in the ratings line (excluding either of the above) would be "Rooks of Chess"; the next two "Bishops of Chess"; and the next two "Knights of Chess".
I don't know that we would want to take the next logical step, of proclaiming the next 8 players in the ratings "Pawns of Chess"! I mean, could one of the strongest players in the world beam with pride as he informed his awe-struck audience, "I am a Pawn of Chess"?!
Perhaps the title "Pawn of Chess" should apply to everyone in the world who didn't make the cut for the list above!
(And no, I'm not entirely serious in this proposal, but it is fun to think about!)
(: BB :)
|Aug-09-04|| ||nikolaas: <super GM> I think the people that are GMs now, should receive the title FIDE GM. To become a real GM, one should be in the top ten for at least one year, or he should become a real worldchampion (that is, by beating the dissident worldchampion in a 12-won-games match). |
|Aug-09-04|| ||BishopBerkeley: <Cyphelium> I wonder if you have read much of August Strindberg at all? What I've read, I've been very impressed with. I also appreciate many of his photographs.|
There is a rather light-hearted website devoted to Strindberg (and a fictional imaginary companion) that I find quite charming, (though some would say it is just plain silly!) The four short animations at this website are very popular where I live:
(: BB :)
|Aug-10-04|| ||Cyphelium: <Bishop Berkeley> Well, there is no way you can avoid good old AS in a Swedish highschool. But I haven't read much of him, just two of his most famous novels and maybe the odd short story. |
|Aug-10-04|| ||acirce: I have read Strindberg a lot, one of my favourite writers. |
|Aug-10-04|| ||Poulsen: Stellan Brynell might not be a strong GM, but he has deserved his title. In this database you can find wins and draws against rather strong GM's - such as Bronstein and Balashov.
Without knowing much about him my guess is, that he found life as prof. chessplayer to hard and was forced to abandon a perhaps promising career - like so many other players since the fall of The Wall.|
So don't invent a new title-system because of guys like him. It won't change a thing. There has allways been a huge difference between being in top 10 in the world - and being say nr. 50.
|Aug-10-04|| ||acirce: For the record, he was up at 2534 only a little more than a year ago, and had been steadily above 2500 for a while, then he suddenly dropped dramatically for two periods in a row - see http://www.fide.com/ratings/id.phtm... - I don't know what happened, maybe some other Swede could fill in!? He was btw 3rd in this years Swedish Championship and probably gained some points there. |
|Jul-16-05|| ||WTHarvey: Here are some mates and wins from Stellan's games: http://www.wtharvey.com/bryn.html|
|Jul-16-05|| ||jenspetersson: Yesterday Stellan Brynell won the Swedish championship for the second time, by the way.|
|Jan-02-06|| ||waddayaplay: Stellan was born in 1962 and became a GM as recently as 2001. http://www.fide.com/ratings/card.ph...|
Just to honour him, I will translate an interview from his chess club from 2002, at http://www.limhamnssk.m.se/klubbtid...
<When did you start playing chess?>
At the age of ten.
<Do you have an education?>
A university-trained engineer with additional courses in economics.
<Why don't you do that for a living?>
Eventhough chess makes for a poor living, and an irregular one, I'd prefer doing that. Although, you do make more money as an GM than an IM even when doing the same things.
He also mentions being a friend of Jonny Hector who is two years older than he and plays for the same club.
|Jun-29-06|| ||grkoste: Brynell called Nakamura a "barnrumpa". What did Nakamura do to deserve this title?|
|Jun-29-06|| ||technical draw: He probably played pardremful.|
|Jul-15-06|| ||BIDMONFA: Stellan Brynell|
|May-25-07|| ||waddayaplay: Nakamura is, at least was up until a year ago, a "barnrumpa", nothing I have seen or heard of him contradicts that. (note: barnrumpa is not obscene, racist, sexist, or profane. )|
|Sep-28-08|| ||whiteshark: Bio: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella...
In the following list of Swedish chess champions Brynell (1991+2005) has different first names: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedis... :D
|May-03-10|| ||Tabanus: He won (as he did last year) the Copenhagen Chess Challenge 28 April - 2 May 2010:|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·