Thanks for the rating information, our meaning is, as spokesperson to general chess-knowledgeable public, Yasser Seirawan would be first to mind. Actual current ratings, always ballyhooed, seem increasingly obsolete or at least uninteresting, as aged forms become well-understood for anyone wont to memorize lines. There is the fact of more-or-less computer dominance, continually increasing, of even those highest rated in their rote play on 64 squares, manageable to Computer. Logical extension of the same idea shows that, so increasingly solved (like tic-tac-toe), FIDE Mad Queen is clearly already game for machines to play from now on against each other, the only innovators. Seirawan Chess site points out that those on the perimeter, having left OrthoChess for other interests, grow far apace of those participating. Whereas, a great new CV like any of Rococo, Centennial, Weave & Dungeon, Altair (or...) would take computers considerable time even to catch up; and we can also design scientifically ongoing Rules changes, or built-in artifices of other natures precisely in order to try stifling Computer systematically longterm -- advantaging more sentient beings constructively, not least tapping mental skills creative not so easy to avail. At other extreme, in order to have more than ten or twenty individuals eventually interested, one would need reduction from 10^3 or 10^4, or 10^6, possible number of CV Rules-sets and far different selection out of them than pure self-promotion, belligerence, phony reuse without attribution -- or even any attempt at finding priorities -- of longstanding Rules, pieces, names, methods, sizes, mechanisms, powers, helter-skelter. One person one game, that the diehard regulars -- or irregulars -- now happen to be discussing here for some tournament or other would be one small step in some reasoning direction.