Nearly all players in the top 18 of the EGF rating list are at least 7d. (http://gemma.ujf.cas.cz/~cieply/GO/gor.html) 6 players out of the EGF top 14 have a professional rank and they are not the top 6. The top 3 has one 3p pro and two 7d (8d rating) amateurs. The 7d ranks and p ranks are almost evenly distributed in the top 14 (the p ranks may be a bit more biased towards the top, but most have ranks over 1p) You might claim that 3p and 5p doesn't actually mean anything, but to me having 5 of those distributed in the top 14 is a strong indication that any player in that rating range actually has professional strength. The lower 7d players in place 15 to 18 might be slightly weaker than professional strength, but with so little data it's hard to tell. Defining professional strength as being able to beat "any" professional 50% of the time of the time is too much, because "any" professional is stronger on average than a "weaker" professional. A "weaker" professional would hardly stand a chance of beating a "stronger" professional in an even game. So the WMSG result does not mean much too me. How strong were the professionals they played? Also, failing to become a professional does not prove you don't have professional strength. Personal circumstances might interfere when attempting to become a professional before getting too old and external circumstances change over time and location too: I think it is much easier to become a professional in a small department of the Nihon Kiin (like Nagoya) than in Seoul or Beijing. I understand circumstances like that are the reason why Cho SeokBin (2nd place at the EGF list) is not a professional. The dividing line between amateur strength and professional strength is actually a gray area and 7d EGF is an indication of being in that area. Dave
________________________________ Van: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org namens Michael Goetze Verzonden: wo 17-12-2008 21:39 Aan: computer-go Onderwerp: Re: [computer-go] UEC cup Hi Mark, > I'm not claiming to be an authority on the matter, but I beg to > differ. Name me an EGF 7-dan that's not professional level. And then > explain how come they are listed among players that are anywhere from > 1p to 5p in different Asian countries. I used to be an EGF 6-dan and > have beaten top 9p players with 3 stones on occasion. For a while I > had a Japanese 2p teacher but stopped taking lessons when I started to > beat him on black pretty consistently. That was when I was still > 5-dan. So I don't think it's so far off to say 7-dan amateur is pro > level. this is actually a rather complicated topic because you can have different definitions for "professional strength". For instance, I could make an argument that S. Shikshina 3p does not have "professional strength", AFAIK she did not become a professional in the regular way and has never won a professional tournament game. So, if you define "professional strength" as "someone who could become a 1p in Korea, China or Japan today", I think most European 7dans would fail. (Dragos Bajenaru, while only calling himself 6dan, has a rating higher than some 7dans and failed to become a professional in Japan in the past.) If you define "professional strength" as "the lowest strength of anyone who currently holds a professional rank", then most European 7dans qualify, yes. I've heard 2nd-hand reports of Noguchi Motoki losing a 4- or 5-handicap game against an active professional player. The collective record of European 7dans against professionals at the WMSG was 0 wins, 6 losses. Regrads, Michael _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
