Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 18:24:39 01/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
Dear Dann: Sorry if I interfere in your discussion. Nevertheless, this a public site where its very nature is interfering and commenting. So, let me say this. a) Clearly you are an above average IQ person. Probably the other guy is, too. But it is not wise to talk about that even if someone in the heat of discussion say you are fool. Clearly he is not making a serious statement about your intelligence, so a statement that you are not because of your IQ is out of question. Sounds a little bit weird. It Is an emotional posture even more emotional that any kind of argument given by any. B) Same can be said of your great empahasis in maths. Maths is a great tool, but not the only one to grasp and understand the world. BTW, statistics, as a branch of maths, has been used several times as a deceiving tool. Many times just common sense observation gives you a fair grasp of truth and many times a mathematical construct give you a false one. And also BTW, maths and his performers are not less emotional than anybody else. To qualify any other kind of reasonning as emotional is one of the most emotional thing that can be seen. C) In this case certainly GM notion can be seen from many sides. You have a point respect the fact that a GM norm is usually a result of statistical processing of how many games you has won to statiscally rated people, but at the same time you certainly, in some cases, can grasp a GM quality kind of player by just one game. I do not see exclusion between both approachs. D) Statiscally approach is a more exact measure? Well, althoug expressed or based in numbers, is not neccesarily so. A player can get his norm just by a narrow margin after 1000 games; maybe with another serie of 1000 he would not. Is, then a GM? Is not? You does not go very far sometimes. At the same time just one game of Capablanca gives a measure of his GM quality. This is a tricky issue at least. E) Maybe the discussion could reach agreement if we differentiates between GM kind of game and GM kind of player. I suppose your opponent refers to the last thing and you to the first. My bet: century is probable a GM kind of player on the basis of surely GM kind of games showed until now. Hope you will not get angry with me. BTW, althoug I am not a mathematician my IQ is also well above average. Some time mere writters can be so. Oh Yes, I am human too and so inclined to emotional postures. Very. My best regards Fernando
This page took 0.01 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.