Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 08:01:24 06/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2001 at 09:58:42, Mark Young wrote: >On June 16, 2001 at 05:27:15, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On June 15, 2001 at 22:23:38, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>Nothing more really needs to be said, but you guys can debate more among >>>yourselves. To restate no ratings system is absolute the rating numbers be it >>>2500 or 3000 mean nothing in themselves. What is important is the difference >>>between two ratings in the same ratings pool. >> >>I agree. >> >>Do you agree with me that hence it is a bad idea to define 'GM strength' >>by ELO rating? >> >>That was what the discussion was about when you dropped in. Yes. And note that it is a human title in a human field of players, hence no rating pool distributions. Also, the rating limit has been shifted over time when it was found that the eloratings of human players shifted too. PS. It's customary to type your arguments in the body of the message. -- GCP
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.