|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-25-18 | | PhilFeeley: <Tell me... how many times did Karpov face Fischer when they were top players???> Fischer was a one off. These days, any 2600 can beat a 2700. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | Appaz: <alexmagnus: The expected score of 2600 against 2700 is the same as 1600 against 1700 (only that the 2600 and 2700 will have a higher draw rate).> So <not> the same score then? You could as well said that all players, no matter rating difference, will have the same expected score - it's just the number of games that varies. |
|
Mar-26-18
 | | WorstPlayerEver: <alexmagnus>
Yeah, because Aronian plays against 2450 players in the Candidates... he did lose only 20 points... ★le sigh★ |
|
Mar-26-18
 | | alexmagnus: <So <not> the same score then?> Same score, different distribution of decisive games. The expected score is in both cases 6.5-3.5 for the higher rated player. But while the 1700 against the 1600 with realize it as +6 -3 =1, the 2700 against 2600 will more likely play it +3 -0 =7. |
|
Mar-26-18
| | alexmagnus: By the way, this also shows why <WPE>'s "never beat a 2600" remark means nothing. A 2700 is more likely to draw against a 2600 than to beat him - without violating any rating laws. Occasionally he will lose too (after all, there are many ways for the 2600 to score those 3.5 points). |
|
Mar-26-18
| | alexmagnus: If you are unbeatable, your opponent must be rated ~200+ points lower than you for you to be more likely to win than to draw. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | frogbert: Also, two of the 2500-players Ivanchuk beat, were only rated 150 points below him. And he's had two draws against 2600-players rated 100 points below. Anyway, if this event would've been typical for Ivanchuk, he would've been rated below 2650 within a year. The rating system works pretty well. In order to improve your rating, you must perform above it. If you perform below it, your rating goes down. Increasing the K (which basically is what <wpe> suggests) only makes the system more volatile and ratings less reliable as a measure of strength. |
|
Mar-26-18
 | | keypusher: <alexmagnus> <frogbert> Thanks. <wpe> If you actually want to say something, maybe try jotting down your ideas first? A coherent post would be nice. If it wasn't for Frogbert I would never have grasped what you were trying to say. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | aporia: Does anyone know what happens with the Portuguese players who missed round 1 due to travel complications? Ferreira currently has 6 points with two rounds to go, but he acquired them all in eight rounds instead of nine. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | waustad: I said at the beginning I was hoping that Andreas Diermair would manage to get his final GM norm, and he may. He has a tpr of 2581, but his first round opponent was rated about 2000, so it would be higher for norm purposes. With 1.5/2 in the last rounds, he'll be there. If he wins next round, the last round won't matter, though he's black against GM Mikhail Kobalia, 2599. Playing 6 GMs so far, he is +2 =2 -2. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | waustad: After reading the official Austrian chess blog, it seems that Diermair already got a 9 game norm, but one of his earlier norms was a 7 game norm, so he needs an 11 game norm for the title. Perhaps even 2 draws will do it, depending on the ratings of his opponents. |
|
Mar-27-18
| | alexmagnus: The "bad" Ivanchuk is actually above his rating now). Which once more illustrates that his previous performance was not that bad - it cannot be too bad if it can be fixed literally with two games. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | Olavi: Or else it illustrates that Ivanchuk's rating is too low, i.e. his performance over a longer period of time has been bad, considering who he is. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | PhilFeeley: Huge traffic jam for the last round: 8 with 7.5/10. Who will win? Is there a play-off, if necessary? |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | et1: Ivanchuk's "too low" rating is still number 31 in the world at 49. 99.99999 percent of chess players would love to do anything similar. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | PhilFeeley: Interesting trivia: The World Champion is from Norway, yet there's no one from Norway in this tournament. It's not like they don't have players who could be there. |
|
| Mar-28-18 | | siamesedream: Conratulations to <GM Ivan Saric> for winning the title! |
|
Mar-28-18
 | | whiteshark: Conratulations to Ivan Saric for winning <European Individual Chess Championship> this time! |
|
| Mar-28-18 | | PhilFeeley: Some top boards managed to sneak back into contention, only to be outsmarted by Ivan Saric. Well done, sir! |
|
| Mar-28-18 | | csmath: Difficult technical win against Navarra in the last round. Very instructive ending and well played. |
|
| Mar-28-18 | | GlennOliver: Strange but true.
Despite the Swiss format, Ivan Saric, the winner, played only one of the seven players who finished joint-second on 8/11, and he lost that one game. |
|
Mar-30-18
 | | Tabanus: Correction report: two players each under two different names, and three obviously wrong game results (slips sent). Not so bad. And Chess-Results has Khazar Babazada vs S Ter-Sahakyan, 2018 <0-1> |
|
| Mar-31-18 | | gomila: "Despite the Swiss format, Ivan Saric, the winner, played only one of the seven players who finished joint-second on 8/11, and he lost that one game." He played two out of top three rated players on the tournament. Also he had a rating performance of 2796. What is your point? |
|
| Apr-30-18 | | GlennOliver: gomila,
If you are Mr Saric, or a friend of his, then no offence is intended. Mr Saric clearly had a very good tournament, playing some fine chess, and was not responsible for the players against whom he was (and was not) drawn to play. My point is that a Swiss tournament runs under rules intended to ensure that each competitor plays opponents with a similar running score. So I found it surprising that Mr Saric had only been drawn to play one of the seven players with the most similar running score (8/11). In fact, now I look further, Mr Saric was also only drawn to play a couple of the twenty-four players with the next most similar running score (7.5/11). So the Swiss rules seem to have created an anomaly in this case. But once again, congratulations to Mr Saric on an excellent performance. |
|
Apr-25-21
| | Tabanus: No anomaly I think..
Just so many GMs. For example Dubov (2701) ended 57th with 6.5/11, and Kuzubov (2689) was 132nd with 5.5/11. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
