Author: Pallav Nawani
Date: 23:24:11 05/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2005 at 01:03:29, Darrel Briley wrote: >On May 11, 2005 at 00:48:38, Pallav Nawani wrote: > >>On May 10, 2005 at 19:17:47, Marc D wrote: >> >>>On May 10, 2005 at 18:53:18, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>http://www.chessmetrics.com/ >>> >>>Hi Dann >>> >>>Thanks for the link. >>>How come Bobby Fisher has a higher rating than Kasparov? >>>Does this mean he is still the best player in the world? >>> >>>Cool >>> >>>Marc >> >>This is a hypothetical rating. As such, it is more of an _opinion_ than the >>truth. All of such ratings I have seen always have Fischer at top ;) I guess the >>people who make these ratings like Fischer more than they like Kasparov. It >>would not be hard to make some changes in the formula and get Kaspy at top. >> >>Pallav > >The previous version of the site before the recent update of Mr. Sonas' >statistical methods showed Capablanca firmly on top in the 1yr, 3yr 5yr and it >seems like (unless I'm mistaken) the 9yr rating catagories Kasparov, Fischer, Capablanca are all masters of different era. There are too many variables in their opponents, play styles, the times in which they played, the chess theories at that time, the time controls, their opening knowledge etc. Because of this, these ratings _cannot_be_taken_seriously_. There is no point in comparing/creating the ELO ratings of players who were of a totally different era, other than for fun. Probably this is what I should have stated in the first place. Pallav
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.