I’m sure the vast majority of those who reach master do so prior to middle age and all its challenges. But surely some succeed, right? (Like Oscar Shapiro.) I’m interested in finding out what percentage of USCF masters achieved their title (or the rating of 2200 for the first time, if that’s more appropriate) after the age of 40…anyone know? Thanks!
Around 25% of the masters in USCF records were masters prior to June 1, 1992, the date of the first rating supplement files, so we probably do not know at what age those individuals first became masters. There will also be players who had their first master rating before June 1, 1992, but dropped back below 2200, and those for whom we have no birthdate.
Going back to 2005, the average age for a first-time master is around 25 and about 12.5% of the masters appear to have been 40 or older at the time of their first 2200+ rating.
However, this includes foreign players who were masters before their first USCF rated event.
In other words, the question is rather hard to answer definitively.
If I factor out those who had a published USCF rating under 2100 two years before their first 2200+ rating, which should eliminate most of the strong foreign players, then only 12 of 326 masters since 2005 did so after age 40. FWIW, the average age of those 326 first-time masters is just under 20.
Given that I’m 2 hours away from 40, tell me that the percentage of 40+ players reaching Expert for the first time is higher. No, don’t research it and spoil it with facts, just tell me it’s higher. 
Off the charts higher! 
Perhaps of interest:
uscfsales.com/product_p/b0291em.htm
chesscafe.com/text/review726.pdf
danamackenzie.com/blog/?p=776
chessville.com/editorials/ro … atmuch.htm
rlpchessblog.blogspot.com/2006/1 … chess.html
chess.com/forum/view/general … gth?page=3
chessforums.org/chess-books- … tzell.html
amazon.com/Chess-Master-at-A … Descending
By the way, Wetzell’s book has my candidate for the weirdest advice to ever appear in a chess book: “If you get in time trouble [Rolf Wetzell] has a lot of suggestions on how to cure yourself of the affliction. One of them is to fine yourself by tearing up money.”
Hortillosa’s FIDE rating dropped like a rock after hitting 2199 four years ago and now sits at 1963. Looking closer, it appears that his 2199 was a performance rating from his first ratable event (in his only previous FIDE tournament, he lost all three eligible games, and I don’t believe FIDE considers that ratable), where he scored two draws and a win against 2300+ opposition, knocked off a 2200+, and lost five against opponents of similar strength. Nice job, but a single event doesn’t give a highly reliable prediction of future performance.
Wetzel, now about 77, evidently reached Master sometime before 1991, and has been bouncing near his 2000 floor for the last 12 years.
Perhaps we need a sequel, “Maintain Your Rating at Any Age”.
I’ve mentioned Erik Karklins (who made Master in his late 60s) more than once. The late Angelo Sandrin (brother of the late Albert Sandrin, 1949? U.S. Open champion) may have been pushing 60 when he made master. Both may have benefitted a bit from the ratings inflation of the mid-80s, but both reached 2300.
Those are the only Chicago-area players that spring to mind.
My thanks to all who have responded–a very illuminating discussion! I find Mike Nolan’s data research to be particularly interesting. Mike, would it be possible to alter your query and re-run it? I would be interested in learning this from our ratings DB:
- Of those who have attained 2200
- And have been below 2000 at any time prior to first reaching 2200
- What percentage reached 2200 for the first time at the age of 40 or above?
Mike, I do appreciate your taking the initiative of exploring the data and making efforts to filter those who arrived in the US already at master strength. I hadn’t even considered that.
I saw him do this once! I played against Rolf several times at the Nashoba Chess Club in Westford, Mass.
Chris, I don’t see any significant difference between what I ran yesterday and what you are proposing. I was mostly pointing out the limitations of our historical data.
I know you’re a busy guy, Mike, so I will defer to your judgment. I do wish that the USCF would make our ratings database available–it would not only help answer questions like this, but also provide data for researchers who are interested in learning, mathematics, game playing, etc. And if researchers are writing about chess instead of, say, poker or backgammon, that might make chess a bit more popular.
Researchers who want to use USCF data can contact the Ratings Committee, which acts as an Institutional Review Board for us, reviewing the proposal and especially the protections for any requested non-public information (like birthdates) and the safeguards for USCF’s intellectual property in general. There may be a fee charged to prepare the data.
The entire ratings database is several gigabytes in size. Making all that information generally available would not only present bandwidth issues but would make it far too easy for potential competitors to use our data.
Also perhaps of interest:
uscfsales.com/product_p/b0115bt.htm
chesscafe.com/text/review857.pdf
I’m almost 57 and I’ve regained my expert rating after 6 years of bouncing around my 1900 floor. I still think I can break 2200 at some point in my life. You have to have goals, right? Oscar Shapiro’s story is a great motivator. I played him once in the early 80’s (I think we were both around 2050), thought I was winning but he kept finding ways to defend. It finally ended up a draw.
Mike, I wonder if the Ratings Committee has requested info on Masters or high Experts who rarely or never leave their home state populated by a scant number of Higher rated Masters to compete against. I ask because one of our state’s Masters does not play in in-State events, but only in bigger events outside the state. My supposition then, is that some of our players may actually be truly rated higher than they are due to not playing in bigger events. I wonder if the Ratings Committee has investigated this problem?
Mike, I wonder if the Ratings Committee has requested info on Masters or high Experts who rarely or never leave their home state populated by a scant number of Higher rated Masters to compete against. I ask because one of our state’s Masters does not play in in-State events, but only in bigger events outside the state. My supposition then, is that some of our players may actually be truly rated higher than they are due to not playing in bigger events. I wonder if the Ratings Committee has investigated this problem?
I don’t recall any requests along those lines.
It isn’t easy to extract that kind of detailed data from the database. Just defining ‘bigger’ events is challenging.
Lots of people have claimed that there are regions that are overrated or underrated, but finding data which supports that hypothesis is not easy.
I only know of one local player who achieved a 2200+ rating after the age of forty. In the late 1980’s, Donald Meigs won a Pittsburgh Chess Club Championship round robin tournament which put his rating above the 2200 threshold. This will not appear in any of the present computer records. I believe his score was 12 wins, one draw, and no losses. It was a gritty performance of uncompromising play. He has passed away. I just thought that his achievement should be noted.