Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: Pre-1996 Lifetime High Ratings

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    Erik: Thank you for the work done on this. I think there is a good liklihood we can add these players to the list. I'll see what Vlad and Michael think.
    I'lll still be working on it next week. Adjust dates (those above are based on August and some may have acheived 2200 in the fall of the year before) and go through the other 130 players to find those active as masters; list their high ratings (maybe some others peaked over 2300). Perhaps count per listing as 5 games (as suggested); 5 listings as a master would meet the 24 game rule. I can then give a final date for a guess of 25 games. Some of those other 130 did become regular masters after 1996.

    The 2300 rating was very rare before 1990. A possible equivalent, perhaps based on the top something like 1% of the players, would be something like
    2200 in 1970
    2250 in 1980
    2300 in 1990
    2350 in 2000
    2400 in 2010.

    I'll give you a column with province as well when I'll email you the file. If there is regional deflation, should that be taken into account?! For example, a New Brunswick player who for years is 2165-2195 would be a master in Toronto.

  2. #12

    Default National Masters on TD Rating List

    The TD database does go way back for player's high, around 1986, and automatically giving the Canadian Master title to 2300 players would only require research as to the year, not trying to count 24 (consecutive) games from crosstable to crosstable or magazine to magazine.

    from the TD database, asuming a high of 2200=Cdn master:
    71 Cdn masters/ 22 over 2299 membership expired before 2000
    130 Cdn masters/ 34 over 2299 expired 2000-08
    187 Cdn masters/ 69 over 2299 expires 2009-12
    29 Cdn masters/ 12 over 2299 expires 2099 (Life)
    417 Total/ 137 over 2299 {plus 121 titled players}

    The majority of masters are still active.

    That's alot of certificates to mail, but will be weeded down to those who haven't played 24 consecutive games at master level.

    Looking at historic ratings isn't just about dead guys, but includes many life-long players still active today.

    How many of these players were masters before the rating database (1996), thus requiring to go through old magazines:
    58/ 71 before 2000
    49/ 130 2000-08
    60/ 187 2009-23
    21/29 2099 (Life)
    188/417

    Looking at the historical magazines there are 50 more players to consider, who aren't on the TD list, but looks like only 3 strong cases.

    Some players are also FIDE-listed for other countries like Oliver Schultz or Ilias Koukounakis. They lived in Canada, should they get the Canadian master title?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erik Malmsten View Post
    The TD database does go way back for player's high, around 1986, and automatically giving the Canadian Master title to 2300 players would only require research as to the year, not trying to count 24 (consecutive) games from crosstable to crosstable or magazine to magazine.

    from the TD database, asuming a high of 2200=Cdn master:
    71 Cdn masters/ 22 over 2299 membership expired before 2000
    130 Cdn masters/ 34 over 2299 expired 2000-08
    187 Cdn masters/ 69 over 2299 expires 2009-12
    29 Cdn masters/ 12 over 2299 expires 2099 (Life)
    417 Total/ 137 over 2299 {plus 121 titled players}

    The majority of masters are still active.

    That's alot of certificates to mail, but will be weeded down to those who haven't played 24 consecutive games at master level.

    Looking at historic ratings isn't just about dead guys, but includes many life-long players still active today.

    How many of these players were masters before the rating database (1996), thus requiring to go through old magazines:
    58/ 71 before 2000
    49/ 130 2000-08
    60/ 187 2009-23
    21/29 2099 (Life)
    188/417

    Looking at the historical magazines there are 50 more players to consider, who aren't on the TD list, but looks like only 3 strong cases.

    Some players are also FIDE-listed for other countries like Oliver Schultz or Ilias Koukounakis. They lived in Canada, should they get the Canadian master title?
    I think that a NM list would include all FIDE titled players as well, but other in charge might not agree with me.

    My idea would be having a list that was organized by year, going back to the beginning of time. I think that prior to the rating boon of 1975 (I'd have to check the date), 2200 would be the standard, and prior to the 1955 start of CFC ratings, a 50% score in the Canadian Closed would be the standard.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Are we just making up rules as we go along now?
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
    Are we just making up rules as we go along now?
    I'm thinking that some kind of historical list could be presented to the Governors in the future as a complete list of Canadian National Masters.

    I don't mean to take anything away from what you've started Chris -this is more an exercise by those interested in the history of chess and chess figures in Canada.

    The rules are still quite clear. Erik has developed a list of people who would qualify under the present rules along with the addition of the 2300 achievement.

    I personally think that the list we have on the web site now (all rating classes) should be restricted to CFC members.

    I think we do need a permanent site for 'recognized' Canadian Masters.

  6. #16

    Default 1800s Canadian Masters

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    I think that a NM list would include all FIDE titled players as well, but other in charge might not agree with me.

    My idea would be having a list that was organized by year, going back to the beginning of time. I think that prior to the rating boon of 1975 (I'd have to check the date), 2200 would be the standard, and prior to the 1955 start of CFC ratings, a 50% score in the Canadian Closed would be the standard.
    THe statement that players scoring 50% in the Canadian Champion doesn't take into account the strength of the entrants. A 2/3 score would be more justified, being equal to the currently awarded FIDE-master title.

    But, in fact, all the 1800s Canadian Championships have been rated! The web has two systems of calculating historical ratings: Edo by Rod Edwards covers the 1900s www.edochess.ca. But Chessmetrics, by Jeff Sonas, didn't rate old Canadian Championships, just international events.

    There was a CFC rating system, 1954-64 where 2300 was a master rating, not 2200. It doesn't seem right to give 2200 players a Canadian Master title when they weren't recognized as masters in their own time (I'll discuss those players later).

    Also, I think having experience playing against other masters is crucial in becoming a master, so prefer to include players with international experience such as members of the Olympiad teams.

    Canadian Hall of Famers:
    William Pollock
    Magnus Smith
    John Henderson
    John Cherriman

    I would recommend the following six historic players receive the Canadian Master title, based on achieving a 2300 rating and playing 24 master games:

    Albert Ensor PQ 1875
    Joseph Cooke PQ 1891
    James Narraway ON 1891
    Thomas Davison ON 1892
    Magnus Smith MB 1904
    Charles Blake MB 1905

    Details from www.edochess.ca:

    Albert Ensor (82 games) PQ
    1873 2377 (3 games) CanCh
    1875 2378 (24 games) high
    1876 2355 (55 games) also played in USA

    Magnus Smith (76 games) MB
    1899 2393 (15 games) CanCh
    1904 2347 CanCh (24 games) also played in USA
    1906 2400 (20 games) high CanCh

    James Narraway (77 games) ON
    1888 2285 (5 games) co-CanCh
    1889 2291 (9 games) co-CanCh
    1891 2273 (14 games)
    1892 2277 (11 games) 1893 CanCh
    1898 2328 high CanCh 1897 CanCh

    Thomas Davison (61 games) ON
    1889 2293 (8 games)
    1891 2322 (14 games) high CanCh
    1892 2272 (11 games)
    1894 2256 (14 games) CanCh

    Charles Blake (59 games) MB
    1904 2266 (11 games)
    1905 2310 (17 games)
    1906 2312 (15 games) high
    1907 2298 (16 games) 1913 co-CanCh

    Joseph Cooke PQ (58 games)
    1887 2201 (8 games)
    1891 2301 (14 games) high
    1893 2282 (18 games) MontCh
    1894 2246 (10 games)

    Of the others over 2200, It could be argued to include William Pollack and Nicholas MacLeod who had invented opening lines and played internationally.

    William Pollack (483 games, but only 20 in Canada, but represented Canada at Hastings)
    1884 2362 (10 games)
    1889 2415 (53 games) high
    1895 2368 (40 games, Montreal and Hastings)

    Richard Fleming PQ 1889 2332 CanCh (only 9 games)
    Frederick Jones 1876 2286 (only 11 games)
    George Jackson ON 1875 2281 CanCh (only 22 games)

    Nicholas MacLeod (88 games)
    1886 2171 (8 games) CanCh
    1888 2204 (5 games)
    1889 2206 (40 games in USA)
    1901 2278 (22 games in USA)

    Frank Marshall 1896 2255 (played in '94 CanCh)
    Ernest Saunders ON 1897 2243
    S Goldstein PQ 1899 2243
    Jacob Ascher 1883 2239 (only 14 games)
    Henry Howe 1879 2237 CanCh
    Thomas Phillipps 1903 2230 (only 14 games as master)
    Ludolph Schull 1868 2228
    William Hicks 1874 2212 CanCh (only 9 games as master)
    Ulysses Flack ON 1899 2207 (only 12 games)

    These other players did well in a Canadian Championship:
    DC Robertson 1894 2187
    RJ Spencer MB1907 2185
    Edward Sanderson PQ 1877 2173 CanCh
    Robert Short PQ 1894 2162 CanCh
    AW Bruce MB 1904 2157
    W Kurrle PQ 1904 2157
    John White PQ 1873 2148
    George Barry PQ 1889 2145 CanCh
    Edwin Pope PQ 1888 2141 CanCh
    Clement Germain 1898 2138
    Joseph Sawyer 1904 2137 CanCh
    Edward Holt 1877 2136
    CT Anstey PQ 1904 2134
    Hermann von Bokum 1874 2128
    Henry Northcote ON 1871 2127
    William Boultbee 1892 2119 CanCh
    Thomas Taylor ON 1891 2110
    Jesse Hurlburt ON 1874 2105
    A T Stephenson AB 1904 2104
    Joseph Shaw 1881 2102 CanCh
    T Riley Davies PQ 1899 2100
    J Fish ON 1898 2086
    Joseph Babson 1893 2071
    JF Cross MB 1907 2067
    Herbert Burrell 1904 2067
    Mavor ON 1897 2055
    Dr William Smith ON 1873 2053
    Dr Henry Vercoe ON 1873 2049
    John Barry 1881 2047
    AM Snellgrove ON 1899 2041
    William Jones 1898 2038
    FH Andrews 1875 2035
    C Corbould ON 1898 2028
    Ernest Kent PQ 1899 2028
    William Atkinson 1879 2027
    Dr Issac Ryall ON 1872 2021
    Donald Ross MacLeod 1886 2019
    Cyril McGee ON 1898 2015
    WH Judd ON 1897 2013
    W. Stewart ON 1899 2007
    Stewart Munn PQ 1899 2001
    George Larmine 1871 2001

    Lastly, these ratings aren't comparable to today's ratings. Looking at early Canadian Championship games is comparable to A-class player's games. Computers can now analyze the moves and assess a player's strength.

    Average elo of top players:
    1880 2438
    1900 2580
    1920 2650
    1940 2642
    1960 2685
    1980 2730

    http://web.zone.ee/chessanalysis/summary450.pdf

    Computer analysis of move choices by Kenneth Regan:

    Staunton
    computer 1990, edo 2479 to 2627
    Anderson
    computer 2060, edo 2395 to 2673
    Morphy
    computer 2310, edo 2634 to 2796
    Steintz
    computer 2210, edo 2529 to 2803

    So the above ratings may be too high as none of the Canadian players are computer 2200 strength.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erik Malmsten View Post
    THe statement that players scoring 50% in the Canadian Champion doesn't take into account the strength of the entrants. A 2/3 score would be more justified, being equal to the currently awarded FIDE-master title.

    But, in fact, all the 1800s Canadian Championships have been rated! The web has two systems of calculating historical ratings: Edo by Rod Edwards covers the 1900s www.edochess.ca. But Chessmetrics, by Jeff Sonas, didn't rate old Canadian Championships, just international events.

    There was a CFC rating system, 1954-64 where 2300 was a master rating, not 2200. It doesn't seem right to give 2200 players a Canadian Master title when they weren't recognized as masters in their own time (I'll discuss those players later).

    Also, I think having experience playing against other masters is crucial in becoming a master, so prefer to include players with international experience such as members of the Olympiad teams.

    Canadian Hall of Famers:
    William Pollock
    Magnus Smith
    John Henderson
    John Cherriman

    I would recommend the following six historic players receive the Canadian Master title, based on achieving a 2300 rating and playing 24 master games:

    Albert Ensor PQ 1875
    Joseph Cooke PQ 1891
    James Narraway ON 1891
    Thomas Davison ON 1892
    Magnus Smith MB 1904
    Charles Blake MB 1905

    Details from www.edochess.ca:

    Albert Ensor (82 games) PQ
    1873 2377 (3 games) CanCh
    1875 2378 (24 games) high
    1876 2355 (55 games) also played in USA

    Magnus Smith (76 games) MB
    1899 2393 (15 games) CanCh
    1904 2347 CanCh (24 games) also played in USA
    1906 2400 (20 games) high CanCh

    James Narraway (77 games) ON
    1888 2285 (5 games) co-CanCh
    1889 2291 (9 games) co-CanCh
    1891 2273 (14 games)
    1892 2277 (11 games) 1893 CanCh
    1898 2328 high CanCh 1897 CanCh

    Thomas Davison (61 games) ON
    1889 2293 (8 games)
    1891 2322 (14 games) high CanCh
    1892 2272 (11 games)
    1894 2256 (14 games) CanCh

    Charles Blake (59 games) MB
    1904 2266 (11 games)
    1905 2310 (17 games)
    1906 2312 (15 games) high
    1907 2298 (16 games) 1913 co-CanCh

    Joseph Cooke PQ (58 games)
    1887 2201 (8 games)
    1891 2301 (14 games) high
    1893 2282 (18 games) MontCh
    1894 2246 (10 games)

    Of the others over 2200, It could be argued to include William Pollack and Nicholas MacLeod who had invented opening lines and played internationally.

    William Pollack (483 games, but only 20 in Canada, but represented Canada at Hastings)
    1884 2362 (10 games)
    1889 2415 (53 games) high
    1895 2368 (40 games, Montreal and Hastings)

    Richard Fleming PQ 1889 2332 CanCh (only 9 games)
    Frederick Jones 1876 2286 (only 11 games)
    George Jackson ON 1875 2281 CanCh (only 22 games)

    Nicholas MacLeod (88 games)
    1886 2171 (8 games) CanCh
    1888 2204 (5 games)
    1889 2206 (40 games in USA)
    1901 2278 (22 games in USA)

    Frank Marshall 1896 2255 (played in '94 CanCh)
    Ernest Saunders ON 1897 2243
    S Goldstein PQ 1899 2243
    Jacob Ascher 1883 2239 (only 14 games)
    Henry Howe 1879 2237 CanCh
    Thomas Phillipps 1903 2230 (only 14 games as master)
    Ludolph Schull 1868 2228
    William Hicks 1874 2212 CanCh (only 9 games as master)
    Ulysses Flack ON 1899 2207 (only 12 games)

    These other players did well in a Canadian Championship:
    DC Robertson 1894 2187
    RJ Spencer MB1907 2185
    Edward Sanderson PQ 1877 2173 CanCh
    Robert Short PQ 1894 2162 CanCh
    AW Bruce MB 1904 2157
    W Kurrle PQ 1904 2157
    John White PQ 1873 2148
    George Barry PQ 1889 2145 CanCh
    Edwin Pope PQ 1888 2141 CanCh
    Clement Germain 1898 2138
    Joseph Sawyer 1904 2137 CanCh
    Edward Holt 1877 2136
    CT Anstey PQ 1904 2134
    Hermann von Bokum 1874 2128
    Henry Northcote ON 1871 2127
    William Boultbee 1892 2119 CanCh
    Thomas Taylor ON 1891 2110
    Jesse Hurlburt ON 1874 2105
    A T Stephenson AB 1904 2104
    Joseph Shaw 1881 2102 CanCh
    T Riley Davies PQ 1899 2100
    J Fish ON 1898 2086
    Joseph Babson 1893 2071
    JF Cross MB 1907 2067
    Herbert Burrell 1904 2067
    Mavor ON 1897 2055
    Dr William Smith ON 1873 2053
    Dr Henry Vercoe ON 1873 2049
    John Barry 1881 2047
    AM Snellgrove ON 1899 2041
    William Jones 1898 2038
    FH Andrews 1875 2035
    C Corbould ON 1898 2028
    Ernest Kent PQ 1899 2028
    William Atkinson 1879 2027
    Dr Issac Ryall ON 1872 2021
    Donald Ross MacLeod 1886 2019
    Cyril McGee ON 1898 2015
    WH Judd ON 1897 2013
    W. Stewart ON 1899 2007
    Stewart Munn PQ 1899 2001
    George Larmine 1871 2001

    Lastly, these ratings aren't comparable to today's ratings. Looking at early Canadian Championship games is comparable to A-class player's games. Computers can now analyze the moves and assess a player's strength.

    Average elo of top players:
    1880 2438
    1900 2580
    1920 2650
    1940 2642
    1960 2685
    1980 2730

    http://web.zone.ee/chessanalysis/summary450.pdf

    Computer analysis of move choices by Kenneth Regan:

    Staunton
    computer 1990, edo 2479 to 2627
    Anderson
    computer 2060, edo 2395 to 2673
    Morphy
    computer 2310, edo 2634 to 2796
    Steintz
    computer 2210, edo 2529 to 2803

    So the above ratings may be too high as none of the Canadian players are computer 2200 strength.
    I was doing some work on the old crosstables, but have not finished and probably adjustments have to be made for quality of event (ie % of master level players).

    In my mind master level is master level of the time, in other words perhaps this is a certain % of the chess playing population at the time. In my mind a relative measure ( especially for historical events) - but EDO is useful.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    I was doing some work on the old crosstables, but have not finished and probably adjustments have to be made for quality of event (ie % of master level players).

    In my mind master level is master level of the time, in other words perhaps this is a certain % of the chess playing population at the time. In my mind a relative measure ( especially for historical events) - but EDO is useful.
    I look forward to seeing your calculations.

    Edo takes the same position that top player of 1880 is rated 2700, super grandmaster of that time period. But note that even with these inflated edo ratings, 7 Canadian Champions didn't make a 2200 edo rating. So it's not justified giving all the winners of an 1800s Canadian Championship an automatic Canadian Master title, let alone those who scored 66.6% or 50%. It could be argued that casual, average players who had the available time could enter so that it wasn't always an elite field like it was in the 1900s.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erik Malmsten View Post
    I look forward to seeing your calculations.

    Edo takes the same position that top player of 1880 is rated 2700, super grandmaster of that time period. But note that even with these inflated edo ratings, 7 Canadian Champions didn't make a 2200 edo rating. So it's not justified giving all the winners of an 1800s Canadian Championship an automatic Canadian Master title, let alone those who scored 66.6% or 50%. It could be argued that casual, average players who had the available time could enter so that it wasn't always an elite field like it was in the 1900s.
    My first gross effort at a criteria at least for "Fred's Unofficial National Master List" was a minimum of two Canadian Closed tournaments with a combined score of at least 100% (ie 45% & 55% would do). I later modified this so that events run as swiss events or multiple sections would need a 60% score for that event.

    I will for sake of argument post this list for the 1st couple of decades and compare it with the EDO rating which we have for that period.

    There is a good question as to how accurate really are the EDO ratings. As an example since he doesn't tie these ratings in with any current ratings (and they only go to the early 20th century), it's specualation. If you consider Chessmetrics, Sonas ties all of the ratings together with one reasonable looking list from 1900 to 2005. Taking the chessmetrics ratings for the top 10 players rated on both lists for 1895 and 1905, the average is about 135 points difference with Chessmetrics being higher.

    The only Canadian players I can find are Pollack and MacLeod and they too, are in this same range. So my inclination would be to add 125 points to the EDO ratings if you are interested in using a lifetime achievement of 2300 as a measure.

    If you study some qualitative history of Canadian Chess at this time, it would be obvious that Montreal was probably the hub of chess, and they would naturally have a hanful of National Master players (again I agree a National Master's strength has gone up over the years). Two prime examples of this are Henry Howe and William Hicks. Both of these gentleman were born in the early part of the 19th century and were rather old when theey won their Canadian Closed titles, but they were at the top of the Montreal Chess food chain for years. With this boost of 125 points their EDO ratings are now approximately 2350.

    I was hoping to run some kind of a second iteration (giving some weight to the strength of the individual competition) on the Canadian Championships (I went all the way up to 2011 with my analysis), but haven't gotten to it yet.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Erik and Fred: I have the greatest respect for you two gentlemen and the amount of work you've done on this issue, but personally I don't see the point. I gather that comparing ratings of different periods is fraught with difficulty if not theoretically impossible; I am glad that FIDE has not tried to formally award titles to the likes of Lasker or Capablanca. Why try to project our standards back into the nineteenth century? Let the likes of Hicks, Howe, and Ascher be known through their games and results, warts and all, rather than being pidgeon-holed by us.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •