Too many grandmasters?

[Hans Jung]

https://en.chessbase.com/post/grandmasters-two-a-penny What do you think?

[Erik Malmsten]

Certainly if they were given a written test of knowledge, all the thousands of GMs have reached a high level of chess knowledge and skill. But who are they?

Back when I was young, circa 1970, there were only 100 Grandmasters and i was likely to recognize their names, having seen a game of theirs. Today, I couldn't tell you who the 100 Grandmasters are in the US. The top 20 or so play frequently in online events and are well known. But by 50th, I don't know. In addition to the GM title for life, there could be an Active Grandmaster title only for the top 100 active players. The bottom of the list would have a couple of changes each month. But not to be confused with playing an Active time control.

[Pargat Perrer]

https://en.chessbase.com/post/grandmasters-two-a-penny What do you think?

Too many Grandmasters .... for WHAT exactly?

For integrity of the game? Maybe that is what Nigel Short is referring to when he says GMs are "two a penny".

A SuperGM (SGM) category could be added .... but it still hides the fact that these levels are still FAR below the playing levels of the top .... 500? chess engines.

You have to go WAY down the list of current chess engines to find one that Carlson would have a chance against.

Some would argue that chess engines have access to memory and processing speed that humans simply can't match. True enough, but it all masks the real truth, which is that playing chess at the true top levels of the game is impossible for humans.

Even the mighty Carlson is a mistake-prone patzer, in truth.

To me, what we have too much of is VENERATION for the human GMs. Yes, they do the best they can and have achieved levels the rest of us can not approach... maybe the new name we need is HumanGM.

Yes, I like that. It hints at the limitations of the human players.

[Hugh Brodie]

My idea - create a new title for the top 100 rated active players in the world at the end of each month. "Active" would denote a minimum number of games played against "strong" players in the last year (or other designated time period). You could drop off the list and/or work your way back on to it.

[Hans Jung]

I like your idea Hugh. It needs a name and to be supported more.

[Ken Craft]

I would much rather see a Super GM category that one could aspire to reaching rather than something related to the rating list. The topic rank needs to once again become an exclusive club.

[Fred Henderson]

Too many Grandmasters .... for WHAT exactly?

For integrity of the game? Maybe that is what Nigel Short is referring to when he says GMs are "two a penny".

A SuperGM (SGM) category could be added .... but it still hides the fact that these levels are still FAR below the playing levels of the top .... 500? chess engines.

You have to go WAY down the list of current chess engines to find one that Carlson would have a chance against.

Some would argue that chess engines have access to memory and processing speed that humans simply can't match. True enough, but it all masks the real truth, which is that playing chess at the true top levels of the game is impossible for humans.

Even the mighty Carlson is a mistake-prone patzer, in truth.

To me, what we have too much of is VENERATION for the human GMs. Yes, they do the best they can and have achieved levels the rest of us can not approach... maybe the new name we need is HumanGM.

Yes, I like that. It hints at the limitations of the human players.

Yes. The answer that is closest to the mark. I don't see what the problem is. The information age has made chess mastery much more attainable for the masses. Much more easy to become a GM when you have computers and access to information via the internet, not to mention access to competitive games 24/7 I say that is good thing. I guess not to Nigel Short. I guess he feels he deserves some sort of special status. Make more money that way?

[Olga Mushtaler]

Honestly, not funny NIGEL SHORT. Your term 'super intergalactic grandmasters' makes light of GM title that is very hard to achieve for many players. The GM title is two a penny??? Are you saying, Nigel, that being a Grandmaster is not valuable???
Diminishing the title of Grandmaster is like saying "Hey, your Family Physician role is not valuable.Why aren't you a Surgeon?"
If it's so easy and not so valuable, why doesn't Nigel aim for Super Intergalactic Grandmaster himself???

[John Brown]

Why not create SGM = Super Grand Master = Grand masters in the top say 10 -20 ,, AGM = Active Grand master any rating IGM = inactive grand masters who have obtained a GM rating.