Well, this is what I think I wrote:
I followed the 1995 match between Anand and Kasparov by buying newspapers from a major newsstand in downtown Chicago, and going over the games and analysis with friends at coffeehouses.

Boris has Huzman and Rothstein (plus some others not named so far?!) -- these gents have been decent 2600+ GMs for years and also have worked with Boris for many years now.

Vishy has Peter Heine and the usual suspects -- a team that has been together for eg. the match with Topalov in 2010. Peter Heine's CV also contains work with Magnus Carlsen, work described by Kasparov as providing the (then) young Norwegian with decent opening knowledge.

Not necessarily. This might be true for if computers were immensely stronger than the top players, but in reality there are many kinds of positions where this is not true. Simply increasing the number of datapoints can be counterproductive if they lack reliability. Blunderchecking may only be a partial measure of strength - but it is unequivocal.

<Nunn as an analyst obviously refers to game analysis, not comparative strength analysis of players from different eras.>

...& how do you propose to analyse the absolute strength of players from different eras, without analysing there games?

<I was specifically referring to the case where one simply counts how many datapoints are above a specific value threshold and how many are under, as opposed to determining the value for all datapoints you have.>

kramputz has kibitzed 355 times to chessgames [more...] May-11-12 Anand-Gelfand World Chess Championship (2012)

kramputz: It is a lot of non-sense by < solskytz >

May-06-12 P Morriss vs J McDonnell, 2006

kramputz: Waste of space.

Apr-15-12 Dighton vs M Basman, 1982

kramputz: Lousy game

Apr-01-12 Boris Becker

kramputz: He is good at tennis but a real "dumkopf" in chess. Boris, stop making yourself look stupid.

Feb-27-12 Pillsbury vs Fernandez, 1900

kramputz: I learned this 67 years ago

Feb-07-12 M Goodger vs K Kuenitz, 2006

kramputz: Stupid game.Waste of space

Feb-06-12 Franz Gutmayer

kramputz: Karpova call Gutmayer a anti-semite. Why did Gutmayer hate the Arabs? Did Karpova mean anti Jew? Is that the only thing they can write in his bio ? I call it racist !!

Jan-30-12 Tata Steel (2012)

kramputz: Goofy demands $20,000 for a simultaneous when he comes to New York City.

Jan-12-12 Charousek vs Lasker, 1896

kramputz: <tentsewang:> Get your facts in order about Lasker, you idiot. You called Lasker a racist.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

A picture emerges. A lot of blind invalidation, with no respect, explanation, reason or discussion.

The guy describes his own writings - 'waste of space'.

I'd say that the exact opposite is true. I'm sure the people who don't like you far outnumber those that do. Therefore, I'd have lots of company in that regard.

As for the match, Gelfand is clearly the weakest challenger since Short. The talent gap between these two is huge.

I predict Anand by at least +2. My only worry is that Anand has developed an affinity for draws recently and this might allow Gelfand to stay competitive. If both players play their best however, it'll be an Anand blowout.

Come on jessica, what do you think you're doing?

Bridgeburner may be a sensible user universally, but his ad hominems at me in his last post and earlier, instead of patching obvious and glaring holes in his methodology, can harde be described as sensible.

What I pointed out in my most recent post to bridgeburner were his deficiences in his communication with me.

Hopefully he'll give answers to my questions...

<drik> What do you mean by the vague term 'immensely stronger'? I believe current strength is more than adequate.

<...& how do you propose to analyse the absolute strength of players from different eras, without analysing there games?>

Strictly speaking, it's the analysis of moves, not games. Reading comprehension isn't your strong point? The methods of these two analysis types are completely different.

1) game analysis deals with finding the truth about games, which moves were decisive, and which alternatives could one have played instead.

2) strength analysis which deals with finding and determining the factors that affect the accuracy of moves, and establishing a hypothetical level of accuracy for all players if all factors were equal.

You cannot apply game analysis methods to strength analysis, because it doesn't measure the average difference between moves made and the moves suggested by the engine; also certainly other factors like thinking time and difficuly of positions have no role, except some vague statements "in time trouble he made..."; "he deliberately sought complications by..."; "he tried to swap queens as quicky as possible, in order to reach the endgame phase..."

<The bell-curve would apply, in BOTH situations.>