Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:47:53 05/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 2005 at 15:15:15, Darrel Briley wrote: >On May 24, 2005 at 10:38:49, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On May 24, 2005 at 08:34:02, Darrel Briley wrote: >> >>>On May 24, 2005 at 08:25:38, Darrel Briley wrote: >>> >>>>On May 23, 2005 at 14:13:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 21, 2005 at 07:42:00, Peter Berger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 20:49:42, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Capablanca was clearly the strongest of the group. >>>>>> >>>>>>Pardon? It's hard to remember a top tournament in history that was more clearly >>>>>>dominated by a player than New York 1924 by Lasker. >>>>> >>>>>You're right. And from 1924-1927, Lasker may have been the stronger: >>>>>http://www.chessmetrics.com/CM2/MonthlyLists.asp?Params=191030SSSSS3S000000000000111000000000000010100 >>>> >>>>I found 5 games played between 1924-1927. In 1924 Capa won 2 games, and drew 2 >>>>against Lasker. I also found one draw from Moscow 1925. Seems like it's a bit >>>>of a stretch to say that Lasker was stronger during this period. >>> >>>A bit of confusion. Make that 1 win and 1 draw in 1924...the other 2 games from >>>1924 were against Edward Lasker. >> >>Two head to head games do not decide who is better during a year. The total sum >>of all games against opponents at tournament time control is a better measure. >> >>IMO-YMMV. > >There is some truth in this, but then again, the Chessmetrics ratings must be >taken with a grain (make that a large spoonful) of salt. In the early part of >1927 Boboljubow is shown to be the strongest player in the world in the >Chessmetric rating. If they made the lines fuzzy, with the width of the fuzzyness being the width of the two standard deviation error bars, then the meaning would be a lot more clear. Still, it's clearly the best Elo information site on the planet.
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.