Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New GM Maurice Ashley - Who Here thinks he is not a GM level player?

Author: Mark Young

Date: 10:26:42 06/19/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 19, 2001 at 12:47:14, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On June 19, 2001 at 11:38:48, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>Is anyone here going to argue that (New) GM Maurice Ashley is not a true GM
>>level Player? If not why, given the arguments made by some in this forum.
>>
>>GM Maurice Ashley USA (Of Chess Wise Univerity)
>>
>>06.03.1966 (Younger the GM Smyslov)
>>
>>2484 rated (Has a lower rating then GM Smyslov has a much lower rating the some
>>computers)
>>
>>2500 best elo (Has dropped 16 elo off his best, This would exclude GM Ashley for
>>the Cherry picked GM list given some of the responses I have read)
>
>Doesn't matter.  He produced the 2600+ norms.
>
>I don't see the point.

Interesting

Then Why exclude GM Smyslov Elo 2491 for the ratings calculation, he is a
Better, Stronger, Grandmaster today then GM Ashley 2484. Or do you no longer
agree with your own logic.

GM Smyslov has a better rating then many Grandmasters and is 80 years old, yet
you impugn him and the data because GM Smyslov who is still a good Grandmaster
is calculated in the GM ratings for what a average GM is. Your argument is the
data is not valid because players like GM Smyslov are on the list. You can't
have it both ways....If GM Smyslov in not a valid GM, then how can GM Ashley be
Valid.

Or is it your contention that we make a factious rating list base on only peak
elo data for all Grandmasters no matter what year they peaked, then make this
the defenition of a Average GM?

What data do you want to use? How will you have us cherry pick the data to
achieve your 2600+ average GM rating.

I will help you:

I. Only Calculate the TPR's from the norms achieved by the Grandmasters, That
kind of cherry pick data is full proof for you Bob, since it take a 2600+ TPR to
achieve the norm.

Is this what you will have us do? Is this what an average GM is, because unless
you do this your Average GM Rating and Theory of 2600+ will never happen.

Snip from Bob's post.
--------
Several points:

1.  anyone check the _age_ of each GM being 'averaged' into this mess?  IE
a 75 year old GM is still a GM, but won't have much of a rating.

2.  anyhone check to make sure ratings were current?  IE Fischer's rating is
not particularly interesting since it is 30 years old and from a different
rating era.

The main problem is probably age.  Just like the "baby-boomers" are threatening
retirement systems around the world, they are also moving up into the "older-GM"
group as well.  If you have more old GM players, then you will have a lower
overall GM average.  Which means exactly nothing of course.
-------



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.