On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:25:41 +0100, Ralf Callenberg
<ralf.callenberg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>14.03.2008 18:46, SBD:
>
>> I would propose:
>>
>> 1400 - HS grad
>>
>> 1600 - BS
>>
>> 1800 - MS
>>
>> 2200 - PhD
>I don't think this is very reasonable. 2200 players are mostly amateurs
>playing chess only in their spare time.
But I'd guess, even if chess has become a spare time avocation for
them, that there were several years of intense, dedicated effort in
the past of most 2200 players.
>Now, recall what you have to do
>to reach a PhD: ca. 4 years of study to reach the MS and then about 3
>more years afterwards (not counting school time to even reach the
>entrance level). So we have at least 7 years of *fulltime* study before
>one can get a PhD. You can only compare this to the dedication of
>longtime professional chess players. So International Master is the
>*miminum* we can talk about when comparing the amount of knowledge one
>needs to reach a PhD, I would see it more like: IM - MS, GM - PhD.
I remember reading (I think it was by Larry Evans) that, on the
average, it takes five years to make Master, five more to make GM.
Anyway, as long as we're comparing numerical benchmarks of
intellectual endeavors, what bowling average would correspond to a
2200 rating ?
|
