It seems clear that one day, possibly in the near future, tourist won't be the only one at $$$4000+$$$ rating. I think that this raises a bigger issue, though: there are too many LGMs. Of course, this is just an opinion, but I don't think that the word "legendary" should be thrown around this often. For example, wrt chess, Magnus Carlsen and Bobby Fischer are legendary. Hikaru Nakamura is very very good, but he is not legendary. Also, I don't think anyone would consider the current world champion Ding Liren legendary.
To be honest, the only person on cf with true legendary status might be tourist. In fact, we can tell that he is the only legendary one because he has his own rank. If any of the other LGMs were legendary, they would also have their own rank (or something like that to signify true legendary status). So maybe $$$3000-3999$$$ should have a different name.
When Jiangly gets 4000, we should change his level to Jiangly.
That would signify true legendary status. So maybe IGM should go up to $$$3999$$$ and LGM should just be taken away, because there is no way there are $$$50$$$ legends who participated in the last $$$6$$$ months here on codeforces.
Even if jiangly reaches 4000, I don't think that would signify he is a legendary one in your definition. Just look at the list of tourist's achievements https://cphof.org/profile/topcoder:tourist and then the list of jiangly's achievements https://cphof.org/profile/topcoder:jiangly — the difference is obvious. If we talk about Chinese competitive programmers, ACRush is the most legendary one in my opinion https://cphof.org/profile/topcoder:ACRush despite him not being in top10 on CF right now.
AI will beat tourist in < 5 years and we will have a rank called GPT.
being like top 50 in the whole world in any field is quite legendary in my opinion. Tourist being tourist doesn't make others any worse
It is definitely a remarkable achievement, but at the same time, bigfoot (wiki) is legendary, and he might be an interdimensional creature. I just don't think cf has $$$50$$$ people that are on the same level as bigfoot. Like to be legendary, that is quite a thing to live up to. And also the Loch Ness Monster (wiki) for those who aren't from America.
I disagree with taking away LGM. Being top-50 on CF is a much harder achievement than being top chess player of all time, seems pretty legendary to me. Chess\go are already algorithmically solved basically, I think that stockfish can consistently crush Carlsen, but for competitive programming top machine intelligence performance is still around 1800-1900, maybe 2100 at best even with more compute and time for reasoning.
I think that the LGM possibility really depends on IQ. For example, if you are like $$$ \lt 130$$$ IQ, it is pretty much impossible. But if you are like $$$160$$$ IQ, you might be able to get it in $$$2$$$ years. So it might not be so hard for some people out there. Also, there is only $$$1$$$ top chess player of all time, but there are $$$50$$$ cf users in the top $$$50$$$ so idk if you are pulling my leg or something.
what''s your iq?
About tree fiddy ($$$\pm 250$$$)
will you write a blog on how did you get out of blue?
No, there are many blogs like that. Also, why not use your main account to comment?
iam a bad person
We all are. Romans 3:23 states that we all sin and therefore fall short of the glory of God. But Jesus Christ is there to forgive anyone whenever they want to be forgiven.
Yes, but competitive programming is may more complex than chess. There are other mind sports but we are not taking them into consideration at this point. Like sure, there are probably some "legendary" Jeopardy players out there but they'll get destroyed by gpt-4o, so it's not that legendary tbh. Same with chess, considering an opensource engine can destroy the best player of all time.
I honestly don't know about using AI to measure the legendary-ness of top competitors in mind sports. For example, while it might not seem like it, I'd bet that top Jeopardy players have similar IQs to top cf players (maybe even higher, just cuz general knowledge is so g-loaded). I'd have to say that what Ken Jennings achieved is higher than LGM on cf. But, ofc, you don't have to agree. And it is true that AI would probably destroy Jeopardy contestants atp.