18-07-2013, 02:27 PM
Hi Andy.
"You suggest that the promising juniors around the 2200 level are not becoming titled
players because they are too reliant on computers. "
Just trying to get a handle on why the titles have dried up and the players seem to stick
just under the IM level.
What has been the biggest change since the days of Bryson, Muir, McNab, Mannion, Motwani, Condie,
McKay, Shaw...
I can only see the influence of computers on the game. What else is there?
These days there are more opportunities to get a title, there are more tournaments, travel is easier,
The planet is flooded with GM's (last count 1,437 - in the 70's there were about 100.) there are
3,301 IM's out there so getting the chance to take scalp has gone up.
Figures from FIDE.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml?tops=0&ina=2&country=">http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml?to ... 2&country=</a><!-- m -->
Our lads show promise, sparkle and ambition...suddenly when they get good they stay there.
England has 35 GM's and 57 IM's. So what are England doing right that Scotland is doing wrong.
A smaller population - Iceland has 12 GM's and 13 IM's.
We don't get funding. Iran a country where chess until recently was banned has 8 GM's and 13 IM's.
Scotland has 6 GM's and 9 IM's three are in their 30's, the rest are over 40.
You reckon that players use the box only out curiousity to see whether they has missed something.
I'm of the opinion it's the first thing they do without looking at the game first themselves.
The curiousity and been replaced with sheer laziness and the deserted analysis room I have seen bear this out.
I remember in the 70's and 80's the cleaners had to throw the players out of the anlaysis rooms because
they were still there looking at their games.
"You suggest that the promising juniors around the 2200 level are not becoming titled
players because they are too reliant on computers. "
Just trying to get a handle on why the titles have dried up and the players seem to stick
just under the IM level.
What has been the biggest change since the days of Bryson, Muir, McNab, Mannion, Motwani, Condie,
McKay, Shaw...
I can only see the influence of computers on the game. What else is there?
These days there are more opportunities to get a title, there are more tournaments, travel is easier,
The planet is flooded with GM's (last count 1,437 - in the 70's there were about 100.) there are
3,301 IM's out there so getting the chance to take scalp has gone up.
Figures from FIDE.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml?tops=0&ina=2&country=">http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml?to ... 2&country=</a><!-- m -->
Our lads show promise, sparkle and ambition...suddenly when they get good they stay there.
England has 35 GM's and 57 IM's. So what are England doing right that Scotland is doing wrong.
A smaller population - Iceland has 12 GM's and 13 IM's.
We don't get funding. Iran a country where chess until recently was banned has 8 GM's and 13 IM's.
Scotland has 6 GM's and 9 IM's three are in their 30's, the rest are over 40.
You reckon that players use the box only out curiousity to see whether they has missed something.
I'm of the opinion it's the first thing they do without looking at the game first themselves.
The curiousity and been replaced with sheer laziness and the deserted analysis room I have seen bear this out.
I remember in the 70's and 80's the cleaners had to throw the players out of the anlaysis rooms because
they were still there looking at their games.