Author: Albert Silver
Date: 08:53:15 06/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2001 at 10:42:19, Mark Young wrote:
>On June 14, 2001 at 09:41:03, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On June 14, 2001 at 08:47:23, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>On June 13, 2001 at 22:59:30, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 13, 2001 at 22:12:59, Mark Young wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On June 13, 2001 at 21:46:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On June 13, 2001 at 14:54:52, Mark Young wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What the hell are you talking about... I never said that. When Did I ever say
>>>>>>>ratings were """"""""ABSOLUTE""""""""""". I said you can calculate ratings for
>>>>>>>past players....and Ratings is the only measure we use in chess. I NEVER said
>>>>>>>RATINGS are ABSOLUTE.... Ratings are calculated for that pool of players, If you
>>>>>>>think the rankings are incorrect you better take a look at the past list because
>>>>>>>you will find what history tell us were the strongest players of the day are
>>>>>>>also RANKED #1 on the repective lists. The Rating numbers themselve don't mean
>>>>>>>anything 2700,2800,2900 etc. What matters is the point spread from one player to
>>>>>>>the next. Don't put words in my mouth and then tell me I don'
>>>>>>>t understand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Then why did you publish the "approximated Elo list" below? That implies
>>>>>>that you can take ratings from today, compute ratings for players active 20
>>>>>>years ago, then take those ratings, and back up another 20 years, and repeat
>>>>>>the above, until you go back far enough to compute one of these whacko ratings
>>>>>>for the player that is under discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>>Your Wrong I did not implie that at all and you know it. If you look on what I
>>>>>posted it has a header "About these ratings" It tell how the ratings were made
>>>>>and what they mean at the site I posted....Did you take the time to
>>>>>look.........NO! That is your fault not mine that you are lazy if your arguement
>>>>>is you just don't understand what was posted. Typical Bob Hyatt tactics....:)
>>>>>Make up something I did not say and try to use it against me. :)
>>>>
>>>>I tried to be polite. That seems beyond your capability however, so, to
>>>>keep it succinct:
>>>>
>>>> buzz off...
>>>
>>>Why? It was your abuse....I only pointed it out and called your tactics.
>>
>>I'll just say that I didn't read any of this as some kind of agenda. As far as I
>>could tell, Bob understood one thing and made a comment based on what he
>>understood. You corrected this misunderstanding and that was that. Note that he
>>explained what he understood and apologized if this was incorrect. Or am I
>>missing something?
>
>I don't know. I'm I missing something. Where did Bob apologize?
>
Here: http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?175072
"If I misunderstand what you provided below, then accept my apology for
interpreting it incorrectly..."
Albert
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.