Author: Albert Silver
Date: 08:48:05 06/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2001 at 11:38:57, Mark Young wrote:
>On June 20, 2001 at 11:21:14, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On June 20, 2001 at 10:54:47, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>>The rules are different. In the USCF, to become a master, you simply have to
>>>>get your rating over 2200. Nothing else. In FIDE, to become a GM, you have to
>>>>get your rating over 2500 _and_ produce a 2600+ TPR over a bunch of games.
>>>>
>>>>pretty simple, really...
>>>
>>>Bob what Fide standards do you use for calling computers GM's at 5 min and 30
>>>min chess? You want to site the Fide standards for your claim on this, and I
>>>will retract my own standards for 40/2hours, and what Fide standard has a
>>>computer made for you claim that computers are International masters.
>>>
>>>Is Bob Hyatt the only one who can come up with his own standards. Very
>>>Hypocritical.
>>
>>Nonsense. We all have our own standards. All these discussions are only about
>>our own opinions anyhow. He never said Fide announced they were blitz GMs and
>>OTB IMs. He stated this as his opinion. What else could it be? There's no such
>>thing as a GM-strength title is there? As to differentiating between Blitz and
>>40/2 I *really* don't understand your arguments at all, with all due respect. Do
>>you really intend to argue that blitz results are somehow indicative of 40/2
>>results?
>>
>>Just as a sidenote, I don't think you will convince him they are GMs (or
>>GM-strength) by starting 257 threads on the subject with tons of stats on how
>>weak GMs can sometimes be or become. For example, one of your threads states
>>Westerinen was less than 2500 Elo some 25 years ago. So what? How does this
>>suddenly make Deep Junior, or any program for that matter, a GM?
>
>I will answer your question when you answer this....
Np.
>How does Bob Hyatt claim
>that computers are IM's at 40/2 and GM's 5 min and 30 min chess.
How? Simple. It's his opinion. You can agree with it or not.
>What Fide
>standards or any standards did he use to make those claims,
Although there may be plenty of factors involved in its formulation, I suspect
the standard Bob used was.... his opinion.
>and if you apply
>what ever standard fairly Bob used to claim computer are GM at fast time
>controls. Why does this not make Computers GM at 40/2?
Why? Because, it's not his opinion. BTW, why does this bother you so much? So he
doesn't think PC programs are GMs, so what? Besides, I for one would still like
to understand why fast time results should in any way reflect 40/2 results.
Albert
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.