Is it appropriate for a person who formerly held a rating over 2200, but no longer does, to continue to refer to themselves as a USCF National Master? We have a person around these parts who has not been master strength, or been over 2200 in over 5 years, yet presents himself to our USCF junior members, publications, and anyone who will listen as a current USCF National master. Thoughts?
Thanks
I don’t know if the USCF has an official position on this. IMHO, it would be accurate to refer to someone who has earned the Master title as a Master but not necessarily as someone with a current Master rating, unless of course that person’s current USCF rating is 2200 or higher.
The distinction is subtle, but the title WAS earned.
From:
main.uschess.org/content/view/7328/28/
“What’s a Grandmaster (International Master, Master)?
The United States Chess Federation awards the national master title to any player who reaches a rating of 2200. Less than one percent of rated players hold the title. A life master is a National Master who has played 300 games with a rating over 2200. Grandmaster (abbreviated often to GM) is the highest title you can achieve in chess. Like International Master (abbreviated to IM), it’s an international title, and is awarded by FIDE, the International Federation of Echecs.”
And on:
main.uschess.org/content/view/8280/365/
"Here are the ratings classes:
Senior Master 2400 & above
Master 2200-2399
Expert 2000-2199
Class A 1800-1999
Class B 1600-1799
Class C 1400-1599
Class D 1200-1399
Class E 1000-1199
Class F 800-999
Class G 600-799
Class H 400-599
Class I 200-399
Class J 199 & below
Minimum Rating 100"
So it would seem that once you reach 2200, you have the title “National Master” forever, but are in the rating class “Master” only while you are actually over 2200.
A subject that has been debated before, and which is unlikely to be resolved now. Is “master” a title or a descriptive adjective? In my opinion, for someone with a rating below 2200 to refer to himself as a master is vain, pompous and utterly inappropriate. But Kevin Bachler, among others, strongly disagreed. It’s a matter of personal taste.
It seems to me that the USCF has answered the question in that the USCF 1. Provides floors if in fact they were saiong that you were going to have a life title. Prime example is the Life Master title given after completing 300 games as a master regardless of whether you have ever earned a floor of 2200. The Life master has a floor of 2200. GM titles and IM titles, also are not based upon a rating level but lifetime titles awarded after once reaching a certain rating and achieving a certain number of norms. The USCF had enacted a lifetime title program which is now defunct. The National Master title is not a lifetime title. A player who falls below 2200 is automatically demoted to the next lower rating class. It is a falsehood to claim that you ARE a master, as opposed to a former master, if you do not have a lifetime title as described by the USCF.
Even a life master may drop below 2200 if they request that the office lowers their floor. So the distinction gets even more muddied.
Michael Aigner (Original Life Master)
Yes a person can request(voluntarily give up their title), however it is something that must be approved, normally after a significant series of bad results. The title is a liftime award though, just like most awards though, a person can aim to turn it down, or give it back. I don’t think that it makes it any less clear, that once someone achieves a 2200 rating and falls beneath, that rating that they no longer have the title. Truthfully it’s no different than a 1805 (A Player) falling in to the 1700s and then calling himself an (A Player) when he is now a (B Player). The system of lifetime titles was officially abolished. We have only rating floors, and the Lifetime Master title for permanent statuses. It is quite clear that a person rated 2199 is not a National Master. It’s fairly Hippocritical to call yourself a NM, when you are eligible to play for Expert prizes, and in the expert section.
Someone can request to have their floor lowered which is independent of having a lifetime title or not. Nowhere does it say that they must be tied together. Also a player holding an NM title based on the lifetime 300 games can win an expert prize if he is currently in the expert rating class. You may not like the ontology or the semantics but all of it is completely legal and aboveboard. When titles did exist, a life class B player could still win a class C prize if his rating was 1500.
Actually, as I quoted earlier, the USCF itself currently states:
“The United States Chess Federation awards the national master title to any player who reaches a rating of 2200. Less than one percent of rated players hold the title.”
The certificate that I received back in 1985 after first achieving 2200, states:
“Has achieved the title of National Master”
So it seems very clear that the title of “National Master” was and currently is a lifetime title.
Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels
uschess.org/ratings/info/lifetime.html
A system of lifetime titles was developed because no lifetime title system existed other than the original life master title which was obtained by completing 300 games as a master. Why would you need to complete 300 games as a master to get the lifetime master title, if just getting to 2200 made you a master for life!
Here is an excerpt from the Lifetime title system when it was developed.
“8. Only established rated players can earn titles. The Life Master title
may still be earned by playing 300 games at the 2200 level. After 1996,
this title may only be earned through the norm system. For a full
description of the system, see Chess Life May 1992.”
Arnold Schwarznegger achieved the title of Mr. Universe, however it doesn’t mean he has that title for life. To jump from the phrase “X has achieved title Y” is a step from the assertion “Since they said X has achieved Y title, this means the title is permanent”. The reason that the GM, IM, and life master titles are lifetime titles, is because they have been officially designated as lifetime titles. No where in USCF documentation is it asserted that reaching 2200 is a lifetime award. It does and rightfully so acknowledge that a player has reached the top one percent what can be considered a Master. Again there would be no such thing as the lifetime Master title that is granted if breaking 2200 alone granted one that title.
If a current Master is considered a Master, is a former Master considered a Master?
A current master is not merely considered a master but meets the definition of a master- he/she is a master. A former master does not meet the definition of a master. There is no title of “former master” The term former is a descripter advising a “previous” status. A status which is no more
You are assuming your claim in order to prove your claim.
Actually there were at least two titles - National Master and Life Master. I provided the information that “National Master” was a title from the certificate provided by the USCF. I think that there might also have been/be a Senior Master title, but since I peaked below that level, I don’t have the documentation for that.
Because they are two different titles. The Life Master (becoming known as Original Life Master after the USCF’s brief experiment with other titles) was certainly more prestigious - and it also provided a floor at 2200.
You seem to be confusing the title “National Master” with the rating class “Master”. A player can certainly fall out of the rating class and no longer be a “Master”, but I see no documentation that the USCF would ever rescind the title “National Master”, once it has been awarded.
The fact that no lifetime title system existed other then the lifemaster title is no assumption but an accuracy.
While indeed a life Master title and a National Master are different. They are different because one is for Life! There is a Senior Master title, however it is also not for life unless you floor out there.
As for you stating that you “see no documentation that the USCF would ever rescind the title “National Master”. It is nothing to rescind it is an acknowledgement that you had reached 2200 It is not stated anywhere that it is advising you are a Master for life. The bigger jump in reason is to assume that all other life time titles are officially codified in the rules as lifetime titles, and this one that is NOT has the same status. I will send you a letter tomorrow stating that you stepped outside at some point. This doesn’ty mean you are outside for life.” The USCF does acknowledge that you reached NM. The USCF can send me a letter today identical to yours advising that i have reached “A” class. If i fell in to B class i would again be a B player. I would be a former “A” player. I could not continue to make the claim that i was an A player in the top (5%) of all players, just because i once reached it when i can not point to any lifetime designation in the rules. If you are under 2200 you are no longer a National Master.
You are confusing the “National Master” title and the “Master” rating class. The title was awarded when the rating class was first achieved. Being awarded the title doesn’t mean that you are going to stay in the rating class, but where does it say that falling out of the rating class means that the title has suddenly been rescinded.
Yet again, you are mixing up the title and the rating class. You don’t reach NM, it is a title that is awarded when you reach the master rating class.
I’m reminded of an OLM who actually uses the title Chessmaster _____. He has since aged, as have we all, and seen his play deteriorate to the level that he asked, and has been granted, for a 2100 floor. When I asked him about this, he asked me why he should be punished for something that he did many years ago.
Alex Relyea
They’ll make you give back your certificate if you play en passant while your pawn is on the sixth rank.
In general, titles are typically held for life. In this particular case, Arnold Schwarzenegger does still hold that title - but you’ve abbreviated the title he actually received. You see he was actually “1969 NABBA Mr. Universe Pro” (among other titles that he won). Notice the year. He still holds that title. But, of course, someone else was the “1970 Mr. Universe Pro”.
This is like state champion titles. We often abbreviate them in the tournament prize list by simply stating “PA State Champion”, but to be entirely accurate, the title awarded might be “2008 PA State Chess Champion”. Or even “2008 PA State Grade 8 Chess Champion”. And while a player might not be the current state champion, we don’t rescind that old title. That’s his for life.
I don’t see this sentence at the linked page.