Author: James Robertson
Date: 19:42:33 07/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2000 at 19:22:16, Drazen Marovic wrote: >On July 14, 2000 at 19:00:32, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On July 14, 2000 at 18:40:10, Drazen Marovic wrote: >> >>> Scientifically is a comp GM strength? According to some here no, though i'm >>>not convinced of that oppinion either. >> >>Science has nothing to do with opinion. > >Apparently reading has nothing to do with understanding either! It is an >oppinion currently as to whether their is enough evidence to say scientifically >if a comp is GM strength. Further again this term of "GM strength" Does it >merely mean a statistical result or is it really more substantive to refer to >qaulity of play! If your average bootom of the barrel 2500 GM played in 3 round >robin 10 game events with Kasparov anand And Kramnik The bottom of the barrel >2500 GM would probably most likely not get his GM Norm much less get the 3 >required. That would not necessarily mean that he didn't demonstrate "GM >strength" play. Geesh the current world champion is barely going to get a GM >norm in Dortmund and Kasparov isn't even there! Nisipeanu's brief flash across the chess scene last year by overcoming many strong players at Las Vegas suggested he was of much greater than >2700 strength (after 10 odd games or so). But that impressive performance turned out to be fluke, and nothing more. The only way to gauge his "true" srength (or close to it) was to look at scores of his games, and they lead to a very different conclusion. Another example: P.Conners in his latest tournament had a TPR higher than what Junior had earned, and after more rounds! Unfortunately for P.Conners, two games dropped it's TPR to less than 2550. Amazing how things can turn around in mere hours.... Take another example: poor Luke McShane. After 9 games in Lippstadt, you would think he was the most terrible player in history to play in an international tournament. However, it is better not to write him off, as looking at the "big" picture (dozens and dozens of games by him) tells of high IM strength. Look at the TPR difference between Fritz's performance at the Isreali League (sub 2450!!!!) and at the Dutch Championship! Obviously, the few games played at either event is not enough to say anything susbtantial about Fritz's "true" strength. Do we want to talk odds? What where the odds of Khalifman winning Las Vegas? If the dudes at kasparovchess.com had bothered to do statistical analysis on Las Vegas, we would have been given something like "The odds of Khalifman winning are 8 billion to 1 against, but don't write him off yet - there is an, er, outside possibility he, eh, er, HAHA HEHE! What am I writing? Hehe, forget it. Don't make me laugh, Khalifman will never win. Now, on to the players like Kra....". Impossible things do seem to happen! It is statistics at work. There is a possibility that you can flip 10 heads in a row, but it is small. If it does happen though, does that mean we have proof that coins are more likely to land heads? Of course not.... James > >There's not enough statistical evidence >>to support the Junior GM claim and that's it. But by all means, take a vote. >>Then Junior would be a democratic GM instead of an actual GM. I would vote for >>it, if it had a built-in espresso machine. Sadly, it doesn't. >> >>Best wishes... >>Mogens
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.