Youngest GM

12 years and bit. Incredible:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/01/sport/abhimanyu-mishra-youngest-grandmaster-chess-spt-intl/index.html

Abhimanyu Mishra, 12 years old.

I was reading that every one who has held the record for being the youngest GM
(Karjakin was the previous holder) has gone onto to do great things in the game.

@moonbus said
12 years and bit. Incredible:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/01/sport/abhimanyu-mishra-youngest-grandmaster-chess-spt-intl/index.html

Story in 7/18/21 New York Times implies cheating at grandmaster level.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/13/sports/chess-karjakin-mishra-grandmasters.html

It appears, from the article, that GM titles are bought and paid for.
The new "Youngest GM" has to answer some questions it would seem.
Why did his father pay $270,000?
Why was the "Youngest GM" allowed to play the same opponents over and over to get his title?
Why didn't he secure a GM norm before he went overseas?
Apparently this is nothing new.
People are paid and the people paying get titles.
Read the above article. It isn't an opinion piece because many great players are quoted in the article about current methods of attaining the GM title and players admit to being paid to lose or draw early.

@r-to-d2 said
It appears, from the article, that GM titles are bought and paid for.
The new "Youngest GM" has to answer some questions it would seem.
Why did his father pay $270,000?
Why was the "Youngest GM" allowed to play the same opponents over and over to get his title?
Why didn't he secure a GM norm before he went overseas?
Apparently this is nothing new.
People are paid and t ...[text shortened]... out current methods of attaining the GM title and players admit to being paid to lose or draw early.

I can try to address some of those questions.

Why did his father pay $270,000?

I took this figure as the cumulative expenditure over the period that Adhimanyu has been playing. His tournament history at the US Chess website indicates that he's played in a lot of events that required travel and overnight stays, capped by several months in Budapest. Maybe he also took lessons with a GM. I can't say whether the total would approach $270K, but I can easily see its coming to six figures.

Why was the "Youngest GM" allowed to play the same opponents over and over to get his title?

According to the First Saturday (Budapest) website, entry closed one hour before play would start. The GM group was a round robin comprised of 10 of the entrants (presumably the top 10, but I didn't check whether the lowest-rated player in the GM group was higher than the highest-rated player in the IM group, which was the second-highest round robin).

So, it didn't seem to me that Abhimanyu's happening to play the same opponents was a conscious decision by the organizer.

I also think that the NYT article overstates the advantage from playing someone several times. Established masters typically have many games that can be found in databases. I looked up Mishra in chessgames dot com and found 73. Going through a player's published games can provide a gold mine of information about a player's strengths and style.

Why didn't he secure a GM norm before he went overseas?

Players his age can develop extraordinarily rapidly. He might have been noticeably stronger this past April than he was even a few months earlier. Also, tournaments were much scarcer last year.

Regarding the two quick draws against GM Nagy, I played through both. Nagy had Black in each, and the final positions offered Black very meager chances to try to win against an opponent who was content to draw. And for him to draw as Black against someone only marginally lower rated was probably more than acceptable. And for Abhimanya, drawing against the highest-rated player in the event was probably satisfactory.

The above notwithstanding, there could have been shady stuff going on. And even if there wasn't, not many players would have the opportunity to play in an event each month that offers the possibility of a GM norm. So, that factor alone would appear to dilute the GM title.

@handyandy said
Story in 7/18/21 New York Times implies cheating at grandmaster level.

When written by journalists who are not chess specialists, Western media articles tend
to misunderstand the context and often be sensationalistic rather than factually accurate.
I believe that the 'New York Times' article should be taken with a dose of salt.

In the 1962 Candidates' tournament, Bobby Fischer famously (or infamously) accused
all five Soviet players of conspiring against him. Given their personal rivalries, it's
hard to imagine that all five Soviet players would agree about anything. Nonetheless,
Petrosian (who won), Keres, and Geller made an agreement to draw with one another,
in order to conserve energy. Korchnoi and Tal (who was seriously ill and had to drop
out of the tournament) were not parties to this agreement. So there was some
'collusion', but I find it to believe that quickly agreeing to draws constituted cheating.
The Kosintseva sisters (both GMs) were known for prearranging draws with each other.
Were the Kosintseva sisters cheaters?

Given the economic disparities between western and eastern Europe, there allegedly were
some eastern European GMs who sometimes could be bribed into throwing a game.
There's a story about a Yugoslav GM who allegedly accepted 400 USD (a considerable
amount about 50 years ago) in return for throwing an important game for his opponent.

In the early 21st century, a friend of mine (whose judgment I trust on many chess issues)
surprised me by comparing a particular WGM to a mattress, explaining that she had
some reputation for throwing games for money. Moreover, he said, she did not
have to do it because she already had a comfortable job outside chess.

Now moving on to the issue of GM norms for young players, it's no secret at all that
some national chess bodies wish to make it as easy as possible for their young players.
So an over-the-hill GM who hardly plays seriously any more may expect to get invited
(perhaps with all expenses paid) by some organizers of 'norm factory' tournaments
to become a sacrificial lamb for that country's ambitious young aspiring GMs.
It seems almost like building up a promising young boxer's reputation by having
him fight a fading veteran who cares only about the paycheck, not the outcome.

If the organizer said to GM Over-the-Hill, "We are willing to give you an all-expenses
paid holiday to a resort where we are holding a chess tournament because we expect
that our best young players can use you to gain GM norms', that's not quite cheating.
But if the organizer said to GM Over-the-Hill, "Here's an envelope with money if you
lose a game that our young player needs for a GM norm", that would be cheating.

Well apparently this new "Youngest GM" is American so hopefully he eventually wins the world championship one day so the United States can stop obsessing over Bobby Fischer and focus on their new American champion.

@FMDavidHLevin

Good explanations but what about the part about replaying games to get a different result?
I will read the article again because I think it said that somewhere.
I'm not focusing on the new kid as a fraud but the whole GM thing isn't so glorious after reading that article.

@Duchess64

True about journalists not really knowing chess but some influential players did make some comments about the situation.
If it was an opinion piece I would have laughed it off but a few big names are in that article and they think the whole situation is shady.

Well that's interestingly strange.
All of those players who broke the record didn't become the best. I know the list of world champions but I assumed some of them were the "Youngest GM" at one point.
I guess at the end of the day it really doesn't mean anything.

@r-to-d2 said
@FMDavidHLevin

Good explanations but what about the part about replaying games to get a different result?
I will read the article again because I think it said that somewhere.
I'm not focusing on the new kid as a fraud but the whole GM thing isn't so glorious after reading that article.

I agree: that's a concern also (as is inviting players who aren't really motivated, mentioned by Duchess64).