Judit Polgar: 'Delete The Women Titles'

Wouldn't it be better if there were not separate chess titles for women? GM Judit Polgar, the strongest female player of all time, made this thought-provoking suggestion a few days ago in the latest New in Chess podcast, reigniting an old debate.

The youngest of the three Polgar sisters, Judit became a grandmaster in 1991 at the age of 15 years and four months, breaking the record GM Bobby Fischer had held since 1958. Five years later, she became the first and only woman to ever break into the world’s top 10. Throughout her career, Polgar has been living proof that not only men but women too can reach the top in chess.

Participation and performance gaps

Because both a participation and a performance gap continue to exist in chess between men and women, Polgar has been asked gender-related questions numerous times. For instance, she commented when GM Nigel Short wrote in a controversial 2015 column that "men and women’s brains are hard-wired very differently" and "rather than fretting about inequality, perhaps we should just gracefully accept it as a fact."

Talking to TIME magazine, Polgar said: "We are capable of the same fight as any other man, and I think during the decades that I actively played chess, I proved it as well. It’s not a matter of gender; it’s a matter of being smart."

Men and women are different but there are different ways of thinking and fighting still achieving the same results http://t.co/IPsiP8NJJ1

— Judit Polgar (@GMJuditPolgar) April 20, 2015

Ambition

What Polgar has argued throughout her career is that many women might be setting the bar a bit too low, even the ones who have reached the top in women's chess. In the podcast, she said: "I've never spoken with a lady from the top who said: 'Yes, I believe that women can become just as good as guys because there is no difference.' There is a difference but it's not the difference women and men have that it would stop you from becoming a top-10 player, let's say."

I've never spoken with a lady from the top who said: 'Yes, I believe that women can become just as good as guys because there is no difference.'

Polgar further noted: "It does matter what they say also to girls, to the next generation, to the parents, what the coaches are telling the small ones: whether you can become a world champion and become better than Magnus [Carlsen] or you tell them that you can become better than GM Hou Yifan, let's say, because then you position them in a very different way."

This point of view is in line with a 2023 study by New York University psychology researchers, co-authored by WGM Jennifer Shahade, which found that parents and mentors often believe that girls have a lower potential in chess than boys, a bias that is more pronounced among those who think chess success requires brilliance.

Women's tournaments

Polgar has always advocated that girls and women play in open events, among men, and not just stick to women's tournaments only. In the New in Chess podcast, however, she noted that she is not against women's tournaments: 

"I think simply there are many things in life where it's just, that's the way it is, and just because that's how it is these days for many years, let it be that way because it's easier than to make changes. (...) Having tournaments for women only is something like that. Why should we change, why should coaches change their mindset, why should the circumstances change?"

Women titles

But Polgar did offer a radical idea: abolishing women's titles such as WFM, WIM, and WGM. These are for women only, have lower thresholds for obtaining them, and exist alongside the FM, IM, and GM titles that can be achieved by men and women.

For instance, it is easier to obtain a WGM title than an IM title: three norms of a 2400+ performance rating and a FIDE rating of 2300 are enough for WGM, while three norms of 2450+ and a FIDE rating of 2400 are needed for IM.

"Lately, I was thinking that is there something, let's say one thing that we could change and then maybe the environment and the life of chess and girls and women in chess would change," said Polgar. "I thought that maybe it would be possible and it would be just a very good try to test it at least, to delete the women titles. I mean, why do we have women titles? Why don't you have a title for 2000, for 2200, for 2300, for 2400, for 2500, for 2600, for 2700? Isn't it much better to have the rating titles and not that it's women or men?"

Why don't you have a title for 2000, for 2200, for 2300, for 2400, for 2500, for 2600, for 2700? Isn't it much better to have the rating titles and not that it's women or men?

According to Polgar, a world without women's titles might benefit how girls and women approach chess and the level they could reach. "Sometimes, with a very simple thing, very big changes can happen," she said, "because suddenly the mindset of ladies would also say: 'Okay, it does not matter whether I play in an open tournament or a women's tournament;, I'm aiming to get this title. This title belongs to my rating, not to the gender question. It's my strength, it's my knowledge, it's what I can perform, right?' So I think that would be kind of a first step which could be an extremely simple solution, and it would not hurt at all, not women nor men."

The New in Chess podcast.

Old discussion

The topic of abolishing women's titles isn't new. In fact, it reached mainstream media 15 years ago when the Wall Street Journal covered it in a lengthy article. GM Irina Krush agreed then with Polgar's suggestion: "I don't see their benefit. Women's titles are really a marker of lower expectations." Krush would obtain the GM title four years later, in 2013. 

Some years before the WSJ article, then-chess columnist Mig Greengard argued:

"Women's chess" is affirmative action pretty much by definition. In a sport, this means paying prizes and holding events for weaker players, and barring Judit Polgar they are. (...) I don't think the titles are a good idea because they encourage lower standards of play. Events make more sense because they help bring women into the game with a toe in the water, at least at the junior level. But women's titles and women-only events at the professional level are somewhat bizarre and perpetuate both real inferiority and an inferiority complex.

Later, Greengard described women's titles as "sexist and idiotic affirmative action that does little more than formalize low expectations."

Mixed reactions

Polgar's suggestion in the New in Chess podcast has led to mixed reactions, for instance on X. Jennifer Shahade noted that it "makes sense in theory."

And the conversation is not fresh. I still vividly remember being mocked by all my friends for earning a WIM norm decades ago. Maybe because it wasn’t a particularly strong result for me.

Recall no joy in all that.

Maybe if it was WIM/JM they’d have said less!

— Jennifer Shahade (@JenShahade) September 2, 2024

The Ukrainian streamer and Chessable author Angelika Valkova would rather "create a better environment in the chess world for girls and women" first, "instead of removing the only little perks they have."

First, we should create a better environment in the chess world for girls and women instead of removing the only little perks they have.

Once it happens and the women’s quote in chess goes up, we can consider “deleting female titles”. https://t.co/rXHZMRI5oX

— Angelika Valkova (@chessborn) September 1, 2024

What is clear is that abolishing women's titles and setting up rating-related titles instead would be a change with enormous consequences for the chess world (including a possible solution to the seriously devalued GM title). The Australian researcher GM David Smerdon noted that it should be handled with the utmost care:

This would be an interesting experiment to evaluate. But it would need to be designed very carefully, and not by chess players.

— David Smerdon (@dsmerdon) September 2, 2024