Twenty-Five Years Ago in The Actuarial Review
A Still Raging Controversy
By Walter C. Wright

This letter from 25 years ago needs no introduction.

Controversy at Rest?

To The Actuarial Review:
Each year as exam results come out, battle is joined between student and Fellow regarding level of difficulty of exams given in "the old days" (generally defined as the period commencing with the first offering of examinations and terminating just prior to the student's first attempt) versus current exams. In order to put this controversy to rest for all time I have performed one of my lengthy and esoteric analyses, the result of which I hereby recite:

1. All Fellows were assigned one and only one class based upon their year of Fellowship.
   1. Gaffers (prior to 1960)
   2. Fogeys (1960-1973)
   3. Champions (Fellowship in 1974)
   4. Tyros (1975 and subsequent)
2. Research was done on each group based upon the 1980 Year Book.
   1. Of a total of 314 Gaffers admitted to Fellowship, fewer than 25% are still employed. In the light of a shortage of qualified actuaries, these results bespeak an actuarial education which must have left a great deal to be desired.
   2. There are 165 Tyros. How tough could the standards have been?
   3. Of 89 Fogeys currently employed by insurance companies, 55 (62%) hold the rank of VP or higher, and 8 (9%) are Presidents of their companies. A simple look at the present state of the industry is sufficient to discount this group as obviously underqualified.
   4. Of the 17 Champions* over 94% are employed and fewer than 25% hold the title of VP or above. This, along with the fact that this is, by far, the smallest class of the four, should prove, once and for all, that the toughest exams were those culminating in a 1974 Fellowship.

*Stephen Philbrick (Tyro) informs me that 17 is the only random number, thus adding additional weight to the unbiased nature of my research.

-Charles L. McClenahan, FCAS '74