Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 03:37:11 02/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2003 at 18:53:47, Sune Fischer wrote: >We can't compare ratings over time, but since all the GMs acknowledge Kasparov >to be the greates ever, it is only natural if he also has the highest rating >ever. I don't see any real hard evidence the scale is drifting unwarrented, then >again there is no reason why it should remain the same, but whether it has gone >up or down I can't say. I believe average strength has increased a little bit, >so even if the scale has "drifted" a bit upwards I wouldn't call it inflation >but rather a natural adjustment. :) > >-S. The whole paragraphe is full of errors. Kasparov is NOT the best ever. This is NONSENSE. His 2800 or whatever are NOT better than say Alekhine's best numbers. You don't get it. You don't read what Bob says. Look at Alekhie's tournament wins and you knowe that today Alekhine might have Kasparovs number or even better. Because Alekhine wasn't such a over-sensitive, but then he drank too much. :) Alo your average strength that increased a little bit, that is a delusion! But go on, you are in consent with the spin doctors who compare chess or was it computerchess with boxing and who call Kasparov the best of the PLANET. :) Rolf Tueschen
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.