Author: Don Dailey
Date: 20:14:13 07/14/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 1998 at 19:46:35, Shaun Graham wrote: >On July 14, 1998 at 10:43:27, Don Dailey wrote: > >>On July 13, 1998 at 11:57:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On July 13, 1998 at 10:30:31, Shaun Graham wrote: >>> >>>>PS #2! :) >>>> >>>>You don't have to defeat GM's to qaulify for the title, you simply have to >>>>perform at a certain level in events of a certain category. In swiss system >>>>tournaments fritz could get paired against almost all 2300-2400 opponents, >>>>defeat them and have a performance well over 2500 ELO. This isn't even taking >>>>into consideration, the 1 out of 4 tourneys where fritz would defeat someone of >>>>the calliber of GM Kotronias. >>> >>> >>>Sorry, but this is mistaken. You have to play in a tournament of a known >>>"category" and produce a result >= X where X varies based on the category >>>of the tournament. And it *guarantees* that you are going to have to play >>>and beat GM's to get the required 3 GM norms... Or you are going to have to >>>roll over a *bunch* of IM players which is just as good. >> >>Hi Shaun, >> >>I think Bob is more correct on this one. The problem is that if you >>continue to beat up on weaker players, then you are virtually guaranteed >>some pairings with stronger players. I don't think these tournaments >>have very many weaker players anyway. But if you can "roll over" these >>weaker players consistantly, then you probably are playing at grandmaster >>strength. I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely, perhaps impossible to get >>a GM norm without hanging with the Grandmasters. > >Sorry i never said that you wouldn't play any titled players. What i said is >that you could play a number of 2300-2450 players and beat them, this would give >you the necessary performance rating, you might play a GM, doesn't mean you are >going to lose, after all fritz did beat GM Kotronias a game in this match, if >you extrapolated a bit on that data, you could posit that fritz would beat a GM >1 in every 4 tournaments, thus giving rather good possibilities of getting a >norm. Further you have 5 years to acquire the norm, in that time period (less >most likely) you would have achieved those norms. >> >>- Don Although I agree with you on the strength of Fritz, or more accurately that I disagree with Bob that it is nowhere close to GM strength, I think you're falling into the human perception trap. The way this works is that people often tend to make "binary" judgements. I think Bob does this a lot, it always seems to be all or nothing to him. Fritz is either GM strength or not even close. I don't know if he believes everything he says, or just feels compelled to exaggerate to make his points. But I think you're doing this too. You are, by construction, evisioning a scenario where Fritz is rolling over a bunch of 2300-2450 players. And you're saying that this might be enough to get it a GM norm. Your making the assumption that since Fritz is better than 2300-2450, it should always win against these players (you didn't say this, but your example definitely implied it since you cite it as an example of how Fritz should be able to get a GM norm.) But I'm saying that if you can consistantly beat 2300-2450 ELO players, then you MUST be a pretty strong player, a GRANDMASTER! You might as well be playing the Grandmasters to get your rating. In your example you're also saying Fritz would only have to win about 1 out of 4 against Grandmasters. So you are proposing a situation where Fritz is not really Grandmaster strength, but still gets a Grandmaster NORM by doing a lot better than it should against the "weaker" players. None of this really makes sense. If you want to make the argument that Fritz is close to GM strength (which I believe) then just make the argument. I believe Bob is way off on the low side but I'm not sure what you believe. It sounds to me like you believe Bob is right but want to keep the argument going by trying to constuct strange scenerios where Fritz qualifies by fluke. But this is actually what I believe, that Fritz would have to qualify by fluke. It is probably not quite of GM strength but could manage to become a GM IF it were allowed to participate in enough tournaments and got lucky. With another 50-100 rating points I think it would deserve the low end of the title. Bob seems to believe it is several hundred rating points away from weak grandmaster. What is the rating you would feel comfortable with as an example of a "weak" grandmaster? I will propose 2550 as the magic ELO number. Does anyone have any suggestions on this? I would rather have an ELO number in mind if we are going to talk about Micro's being of grandmaster strength. - Don
This page took 0.01 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.