CFC National Master Titles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roger Patterson
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Bindi Cheng View Post
    I don't get what your problem is with me Roger but I've never badmouthed you in any way so i really don't understand why you want to launch personal attacks against me. If you actually read what I said instead of ignoring them completely, you can see that the problem with the new title system is that it awards even 1000 rated players a *title.* I have plenty of university friends who play chess and I can tell you for a fact that I've known some people who just play casually and even they can attain the Class E title. What's the point of motivating players to improve if they're satisfied with a so-called 10 dollar title that they can hang anywhere around their home? Do you seriously want to buy the National Candidate Master title?

    Furthermore, who are these chess players that you're talking about that think getting a GM title is not worthwhile? Canada has only a few grandmasters and the last time I checked, apart from Mark and Kevin, everyone has always been under 2600 so I'm sure it's not anyone from Canada. If you're comparing Canada to the world in a global sense, I'm sure these "chess players" would think the new title table is a satirical piece of work.
    ?? exactly how or when did I bad mouth you? What personal attack?

    I didn't ever buy a $10 certificate for NM so no, I wouldn't buy a CM title certificate either. In fact, I wouldn't buy any certificate for any title up to and including world champion. Either you are what ever it is or you are not in my view. But that's just my feeling. I have no objection if someone else wants the piece of paper.

    Nigel Short comes to mind as someone who thinks a GM title is not worth anything as has been published elsewhere. Feels pretty much the same way about GM titles as you do about NM titles as far as I can tell. I'm sure he's entitled to think of a mere 2500 GM as weak but the rest of us can still aspire to that level.

    But the whole arguement about these levels being not a big deal on the world scene so therefore they should not be recognized is spurious. Pretty much every club championship, city championship, provincial championship or even national championship in Canada is meaningless on the world scale. Doesn't stop anybody from having those championships and giving out trophys etc. Likewise for rating class levels.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bindi Cheng
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Roger Patterson View Post
    Didn't you ever graduate from grade 1? Grade 2?..... I could tell you I think having a PhD is no big deal but it wouldn't (and shouldn't) stop people from getting any of the intermediate steps that they care to and are capable of getting.

    The classes are a statement of fact, not anything else.

    For that matter, I can think of lots of people , some of them chess players, who don't think a gm title is worthwhile.
    I don't get what your problem is with me Roger but I've never badmouthed you in any way so i really don't understand why you want to launch personal attacks against me. If you actually read what I said instead of ignoring them completely, you can see that the problem with the new title system is that it awards even 1000 rated players a *title.* I have plenty of university friends who play chess and I can tell you for a fact that I've known some people who just play casually and even they can attain the Class E title. What's the point of motivating players to improve if they're satisfied with a so-called 10 dollar title that they can hang anywhere around their home? Do you seriously want to buy the National Candidate Master title?

    Furthermore, who are these chess players that you're talking about that think getting a GM title is not worthwhile? Canada has only a few grandmasters and the last time I checked, apart from Mark and Kevin, everyone has always been under 2600 so I'm sure it's not anyone from Canada. If you're comparing Canada to the world in a global sense, I'm sure these "chess players" would think the new title table is a satirical piece of work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Ruben
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
    1. A Canadian Closed (zonal) champion gets IM automatically in case he has no such title yet.
    2. Players with 50% get FM.

    The CFC does not compete with FIDE titles. If you think that your potential is bigger than NM with 2200 CFC, then go for IM or GM, and the CFC will adore as a Honorary Member.

    You might be a big fish in a Canadian chess pool but be aware of sharks waiting in open waters :D
    It was only to show the kind of accomplishments which are necessary in CC. Canada is not a zone in CC.

    I haven't swam in the Canadian pool in around 15 years and prefer the open waters.

    Here is my last completed event. Team play on an international team of friends. It might be my last event. I haven't decided for sure. My game is not what it used to be.

    http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCr....aspx?id=20759

    Leave a comment:


  • Egidijus Zeromskis
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    "The title CCCA Master is a permanent title which can only be achieved by fulfilling one of the 9 requirements below:

    1. Win the Canadian Closed CC Championship. (K-series)

    2. Finish 2nd or 3rd twice in the Canadian Closed CC Championship ("K")
    1. A Canadian Closed (zonal) champion gets IM automatically in case he has no such title yet.
    2. Players with 50% get FM.

    The CFC does not compete with FIDE titles. If you think that your potential is bigger than NM with 2200 CFC, then go for IM or GM, and the CFC will adore as a Honorary Member.

    You might be a big fish in a Canadian chess pool but be aware of sharks waiting in open waters :D

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Ruben
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by David Ottosen View Post
    Then how can you comment on it's meaningfulness or lack thereof?
    OK, David. I take it you think 2200 is a mark of excellence around the world and the majority of nations would use the same criteria as the CFC for a National Master title. Fair enough. Enjoy.

    It seems from the list they will start with around 120 National Masters. About 6.5% of the membership will be national masters to start. That doesn't count the FIDE IM or GM titled players who should get one or inactive players who only need join to receive recognition.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Ottosen
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Gary Ruben View Post
    I have no idea.
    Then how can you comment on it's meaningfulness or lack thereof?

    Leave a comment:


  • Roger Patterson
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Bindi Cheng View Post
    The elitist club is fun and all but as you've noticed, I kinda stopped bashing the NM title.....

    I mean... give people "NM Titles" sure, but look at these other ones...
    Didn't you ever graduate from grade 1? Grade 2?..... I could tell you I think having a PhD is no big deal but it wouldn't (and shouldn't) stop people from getting any of the intermediate steps that they care to and are capable of getting.

    The classes are a statement of fact, not anything else.

    For that matter, I can think of lots of people , some of them chess players, who don't think a gm title is worthwhile.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bindi Cheng
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Fred McKim View Post
    OK. Gary & Bindi. I don't want to start a flame war with you guys, but you've obviously both lost touch with the reality of the situation.

    Not everybody can become a Senior International Master (Correspondence Chess) or an IM.

    Everyone's goals are important, and not everyone has the desire or capability to reach such lofty heights.

    I'm not sure what kind of a message you're trying to send here, as I don't see too many others jumping on this elitist bandwagon.

    Most of us won't ever become International level players, but a level of achievement title or certificate is still a nice recognition.

    But that's just my opinion.
    The elitist club is fun and all but as you've noticed, I kinda stopped bashing the NM title. The funnier part of the cfc title distribution is

    The CFC officially recognizes the following titles, rating classes and CFC rating floors:
    National Master (2200), National Candidate Master (2000), Class A (1800), Class B (1600), Class C (1400), Class D (1200), and Class E (1000).

    I mean... give people "NM Titles" sure, but look at these other ones...

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Ruben
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by David Ottosen View Post
    What % of the active CFC userbase would you estimate has achieved the 24 games at 2200?
    I have no idea. Above they have listed about 120 players to start. I also have no idea if it's only active members because I can think of some who might not be and probably qualify.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Ottosen
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Gary Ruben View Post
    Well Fred, I don't think a rating of 2200 over 24 games is all that meaningful these days. Ratings have inflated up to 2700, even in Canada.
    What % of the active CFC userbase would you estimate has achieved the 24 games at 2200?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Ruben
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Fred McKim View Post
    Of course, with time to actually study and/or living in a more favourable part of the country chess-wise things could be different.
    I never felt bad about not seeing where my chess would take me with intensive study. No regrets about choosing the work world. At the top of the chess pyramid there can only be one and it was never going to be me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aris Marghetis
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Alvah, it's great to see you here! I have been trying to contact you for months. Have you looked at Silman's rewrite of How to Reassess Your Chess? One of your games (I know of no other A.Mayo!) is in there, complete with quotes from you! Awesome! :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Alvah Mayo
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Traditionally, the FM title was worth a fair bit more than an NM title. However nowadays, as long as FIDE continues to hand FM titles out like candy to 1300 rated kids, it makes things less clear.
    We'll just have to keep track for ourselves as to which FM's are "real" and which ones opened the right CrackerJack box.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred McKim
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Gary Ruben View Post
    The average rating of the Canadian players in the current postal Olympiad is 2423. One IM and 3 untitled players. Only one below 2400. I'm don't play postal at my age.

    The last server Olympiad we played which started in 2006 had the Canadian players with an average rating of 2360. It was 6 boards playing. We had 2 IM's.

    Regarding the difficulty level, being difficult to obtain is what makes a title worthwhile.
    Well, maybe once this catches on, we'll go back and introduce the National Senior Master title, which didn't quite catch the fancy of the Governors this time around.

    Something always seem easier to attain, by those who have accomplished it, than by those who haven't and will never.

    I would love to be able to say I have a National Master title, someday but can accept that it may well be out of my reach, after a 30 year plateau right around 2000 or so. Of course, with time to actually study and/or living in a more favourable part of the country chess-wise things could be different.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Ruben
    replied
    Re: CFC National Master Titles

    Originally posted by Fred McKim View Post
    The CCCA Master title appears significantly more difficult, and if the same sort of achievements applied to Cdn OTB play would only be achievable by IM level players.

    Having said that, I don't know what sort of ratings players on the CCCA Olympic team have, or the Canadian Champion would typically have.
    The average rating of the Canadian players in the current postal Olympiad is 2423. One IM and 3 untitled players. Only one below 2400. I'm don't play postal at my age.

    The last server Olympiad we played which started in 2006 had the Canadian players with an average rating of 2360. It was 6 boards playing. We had 2 IM's.

    Regarding the difficulty level, being difficult to obtain is what makes a title worthwhile.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X