For a game that is more appealing for people with good memory and money and hardware, the scant way of handling woman titles is again showing up in FIDE and this will be counterproductive in the long run. Tech is changing by the second and we're having stronger engines every other day but FIDE is continuing to remain oblivious and relaxing measures for reasons that seem unclear.
One of the popular chess streamers, lularobs, apparently has earned the WCM title, candidate master, after some change in rules for 2024 I presume. She played at the 44th Olympiad in India, which was held in Aug 2022, it's been more than a year.
Her rating performance was 1465 in the Women's section, scoring 4/10,
chess-results.com/tnr653632.aspx?lan=1&art=9&fed=JCI&flag=30&snr=488
**This requirement does not apply to direct CM/WCM titles earned at the Open and Women’s Chess Olympiads**
These are the 2024 rules as per FIDE, they've given the option to have a conditional title while also neglecting the achievement of 1800 rating as a necessity. This key statement is the variation when compared to the rules that were valid till Dec 2023.
Popular chess players are defending these woman exclusive titles and although there has been some mindless rant on X by random people, there are also legit questions that need open discussion on why this advantage to women is necessary at all in the first place in this era. If correcting past wrongs is the norm then there should be strict steps in terms of policy to curb special cases like in the case of lularobs. Their rating is 1488 as per FIDE and they are participating in titled arenas on chesscom as well, despite not reaching 1800 FIDE because of this new rule change.
This is definitely not about who is asking these questions but rather about the unfair process that has no framework in place, it will lead to a lot of sub-standard chess players getting titles, which btw are already losing value. If taking advantage of dubious rules for boosts in career or reeking profits in a side gig becomes the norm, then the reason for starting women exclusive titles to encourage young and strong talents becomes absolutely meaningless, and we're on our way already. This will distract young female chess players towards shorter goals, again reliant on somebody's mood at FIDE and so they won't progress faster to becoming an IM or GM and level the playing field at the top - which is what matters.
Not singling out, but since @QueenRosieMary 's post got some different perspectives a few months back, would like to hear what her thoughts are on this. Also tagging @funkmaus here since she's straightforward about her thoughts.
Many women players do not endorse this segregation and Judit of course has always advised to go fight it out in the Open section and not limit oneself to exclusive titles.
One of the popular chess streamers, lularobs, apparently has earned the WCM title, candidate master, after some change in rules for 2024 I presume. She played at the 44th Olympiad in India, which was held in Aug 2022, it's been more than a year.
Her rating performance was 1465 in the Women's section, scoring 4/10,
chess-results.com/tnr653632.aspx?lan=1&art=9&fed=JCI&flag=30&snr=488
**This requirement does not apply to direct CM/WCM titles earned at the Open and Women’s Chess Olympiads**
These are the 2024 rules as per FIDE, they've given the option to have a conditional title while also neglecting the achievement of 1800 rating as a necessity. This key statement is the variation when compared to the rules that were valid till Dec 2023.
Popular chess players are defending these woman exclusive titles and although there has been some mindless rant on X by random people, there are also legit questions that need open discussion on why this advantage to women is necessary at all in the first place in this era. If correcting past wrongs is the norm then there should be strict steps in terms of policy to curb special cases like in the case of lularobs. Their rating is 1488 as per FIDE and they are participating in titled arenas on chesscom as well, despite not reaching 1800 FIDE because of this new rule change.
This is definitely not about who is asking these questions but rather about the unfair process that has no framework in place, it will lead to a lot of sub-standard chess players getting titles, which btw are already losing value. If taking advantage of dubious rules for boosts in career or reeking profits in a side gig becomes the norm, then the reason for starting women exclusive titles to encourage young and strong talents becomes absolutely meaningless, and we're on our way already. This will distract young female chess players towards shorter goals, again reliant on somebody's mood at FIDE and so they won't progress faster to becoming an IM or GM and level the playing field at the top - which is what matters.
Not singling out, but since @QueenRosieMary 's post got some different perspectives a few months back, would like to hear what her thoughts are on this. Also tagging @funkmaus here since she's straightforward about her thoughts.
Many women players do not endorse this segregation and Judit of course has always advised to go fight it out in the Open section and not limit oneself to exclusive titles.
