Author: Chessfun
Date: 08:20:22 03/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 21, 2000 at 11:02:03, Chessfun wrote: >On March 21, 2000 at 10:53:46, Côme wrote: > >>On March 21, 2000 at 09:30:14, David Amatulli wrote: >> >>> >>>Congradulations, don't listen to what there saying there just jealous. An IM is >>>an IM no matter what organiztion he plays in, someone out there thinks he >>>deserves that title, so give him his respect. >> >>Hello David, >>An IM ICCF and a IM FIDE is very different !! >>I know some very strong postal players who are weak in over the board game, >>it's not the same thing. >>Best Regards >>Alexandre Côme To IMHO imply he is weak over the board is wrong: Lets look at all the IM's at chessnet at who have a lightning rating: Aldama(IM) Lightning 2326 55 24 3 82 2331 apetelin(IM) Lightning 2328 43 56 7 106 2429 Appel(IM) Lightning 2748 306 24 12 342 2769 HHuerter(IM) Lightning 2563 381 193 14 588 2566 Moussa(IM) Lightning 2548 936 792 100 1828 2648 Pawelek(IM) Lightning 2528 45 25 8 78 2533 Tissir(IM) Lightning 2308 24 27 2 53 2394 Valvo(IM) Lightning 2165 36 50 4 90 2220 Portilho(IM) Lightning 2420 2449 1779 180 4408 2478 Seems his rating is higher than 4 of the 8 IM's listed so he obviously is experienced. And that after playing 2449 games of lightning and holding a rating of 2420 he is not weak over the board. Thanks. >Just as a note, he is an IM no? my post says I beat an IM no? >And as far as weak over the board. >I leave others to judge his "over the internet" ratings are: > > rating win loss draw total best >Blitz 2339 1930 1483 219 3632 2341 >(15-Mar-2000) >Standard 2118 41 25 8 74 2118 >(09-Mar-1999) >Lightning 2420 2449 1779 180 4408 2478 >(20-Nov-1999) > >Thanks.
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.