Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: "Statistically insignificant" Anand win against Kramnik

Author: Jorge Pichard

Date: 08:04:04 12/26/00

Go up one level in this thread


On December 25, 2000 at 17:22:32, Charles Milton Ling wrote:

>On December 25, 2000 at 12:29:17, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>
>>On December 25, 2000 at 12:15:27, Charles Milton Ling wrote:
>>
>>>I am not arguing about the confidence level.
>>>I would only like to state that Anand is really to be pitied if winning three
>>>games and drawing one is ascribed to mere good fortune.
>>>
>>>Charley
>>
>>Remember you first have to qualify to play at the final by eliminating a bunch
>>of other good players. Therefore, by just qualifying to play at the final it was
>>a very tidious task which required much more than simply winning convincibly
>>3.5 games he also was the only players not to lose a single game period. Sorry
>>your comment is reflecting the same attitude of all Shirov's fans.
>>
>>PS: Can you simply accept the fact that he was the best player overall, not only
>>for winning this Knockout FIDE match, but the best player period.
>>
>>Pichard.
>
>Please...
>Read what I said again more carefully.  I was *emphasizing* that if you expect
>more of Anand than the result he achieved, you are demanding the absurd.
>Incidentally, as far as any "fandom" of mine goes, it extends equally to both of
>these great players.
>"Best player period"?  Debatable.  But I won't argue.  (I think there is *no*
>"best player period" at the moment.)
>Charley

Probably this article base on these probabilities will convince you; As you can
tell all the experts agreed that Anand was the best form the start:

http://www.kasparov.com/serve/templates/folders/show.asp?p_docID=13880&p_docLang=EN

Pichard.



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.