Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 15:29:58 05/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2002 at 16:37:46, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >>Let's not forget that correspondence ratings are probably inflated a lot. >>The best players at this specialty probably never played a single game. >>For instance, I have no doubt in my mind that Kasparov will eat alive any >>correspondence player by a huge margin. What would be the rating of Kasparov if >>it decides to really go into it? 3000?. IMO, They are just from different >>levels. It is very often to see correspondence ratings that are 200 points >>higher than their respective FIDE rating. > >I partially agree. > >I think "inflated" means "higher than you should expect based on average >performance". ut that can never happen, as rating is "related to the >opposition". > >In that case there is no inflation for any chess form, including correspondence >chess. That your CC rating is higher than an OTB rating, is not necessary - each >discipline has it's experts - but not so illogical. > >If I play on an online server, and restrict myself to playing 3,0 or 5,0 blitz, >my rating on that server is like 1300 or 1400. When playing longer time >controls, but also rapid play like 20 minutes a game, my rating is already >1600-1650. When playing OTB with tournament controls, my rating rises to >1750-1850. When playing correspondence chess, I have a rating on that particular >server of 2000-2100. > >The "progress" is almost linear and related to increasing use of time. Of course >it is quite logically that -when having more time to think and thus more time to >analyse- strenght will improve until the point of your "natural maximum >strenght". > >As rating is always something "related to the pool of players", a CC rating >can't be compared to an OTB rating. >As you state it yourself, that even goes for Kasparov. > >The only reason for applying ratings is to get an impression of strenght of an >opponent in the pool you play. > >I even don't know if I could win playing against an OTB 2000-2100 player, he or >she playing with tournament time controls, me playing at CC time controls. Those >two ratings are maybe not from the same "pool of players". And maybe if they >were, not everyone might have the same rise in strenght with prolonged time >controls - ratingwise. > >But -again- that is not the purpose of ratings. > >Ratings are always relative, and thus are never inflated, they just tell >something about your strenght between your opponents playing the same game. > >J. Let me be more specific. What I mean "inflated" is this: The best player OTB is ~2800, top 10 are 2700+ etc. If all the top 100 OTB player would start to play CC in the pool of the current CC players, the #1 (maybe kasparov, maybe not) will probably reach performances of a much higher number than ~2800. Regards, Miguel
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.