Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 7839
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by JustinHorton » Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:56 pm

I thought he did already. Leastways I've never heard him say any different.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4079
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:04 pm

JustinHorton wrote:Or maybe we could colour code the postings according to the grade of the posters. GMs could be all shimmery and gold with a trumpet sound when they post.
FMs could post their entire posts in Navy Blue. Oh wait, that already happens.

User avatar
Rob Thompson
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: Behind you

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Rob Thompson » Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:11 am

Reading this after midnight gave a new understanding to Colin's post.
True glory lies in doing what deserves to be written; in writing what deserves to be read.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:54 pm

Colin S Crouch wrote:Earlier today, a match captain from Ealing, trying to manufacture a protest, to try to squeeze out an extra half-point, claimed that he knew very little about the rules of chess, the FIDE rules were wrong, and wanted to engage in long discussion. I looked up his grading, 150, lower than both teams involved, and equal to, or lower than, all other players involved. He had no arbiting understanding either. He wanted a long "chat" with various Harrow players. Can't be bothered. Better perhaps to send the emails to Alex.
I await the e-mails filling my inbox with baited breath... :cry:

Brendan O'Gorman
Posts: 605
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Brendan O'Gorman » Tue Apr 01, 2014 2:46 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
-- text omitted --

I await the e-mails filling my inbox with baited breath... :cry:
Sounds creepy - try bated

harrylamb
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:33 am

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by harrylamb » Tue Apr 01, 2014 5:57 pm

Colin S Crouch wrote: Can't be bothered.
Strange. You were bothered enough to write a post criticising the Ealing captain.
No taxation without representation

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:52 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Colin S Crouch wrote:In Mamedjarov's two early losses, he was playing at perhaps about 180 strength. Surprise, surprise, a 180 player boldly claimed that Anand was playing absolutely brilliant chess, and has been sticking to his line right through to the end. A quick glance at the sidebar would suggest that his enthusiasm was misplaced.
Since you seem to repeatedly refer to my posts, could you please remind me where I qualified Anand's play as "absolutely brilliant"?
No replies to this one then?

PeterFarr
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
Location: Horsham, Sussex

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by PeterFarr » Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:05 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Colin S Crouch wrote:In Mamedjarov's two early losses, he was playing at perhaps about 180 strength. Surprise, surprise, a 180 player boldly claimed that Anand was playing absolutely brilliant chess, and has been sticking to his line right through to the end. A quick glance at the sidebar would suggest that his enthusiasm was misplaced.
Since you seem to repeatedly refer to my posts, could you please remind me where I qualified Anand's play as "absolutely brilliant"?
No replies to this one then?
Well that would be because you never said any such thing.

However you did say:
My prediction is for Kramnik to win the event and for Anand to be the surprise contestant for the win until the last game.
.. which was the closest anyone came to predicting Anand as the winner (Barry Sandercock had a pretty good effort with his prediction of Karjakin). :D

Nick Thomas
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:56 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Nick Thomas » Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:58 pm

What's this all about then?

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Apr 02, 2014 4:57 pm

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:
-- text omitted --

I await the e-mails filling my inbox with baited breath... :cry:
Sounds creepy - try bated
I suppose I got my just desserts. :wink:



(Deliberate)

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4098
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Wed Apr 02, 2014 8:13 pm

Nick Thomas wrote:What's this all about then?
He must be referring to Colm Daly, who else? 8)

MSoszynski
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:43 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by MSoszynski » Thu Apr 03, 2014 9:04 pm

Colin S Crouch wrote:Do I really need to try to read a string of 1300 players, in the hope that something sensible will turn up? No, just flick through it, wait until there is someone rated over 2000, or preferably even stronger, and look closely at 2200+ players. It is useful to cut out the junk.
Colin,

1. Grades and ratings are a reflection of a person's playing strength and competitiveness under match conditions. Nothing more.
2. Most of the forum discussions aren't based around chess move analyses anyway. And when they are, computer engines can often provide some of the answers.
3. To judge the validity of an argument by a quality of the poster is logically fallacious.

It seems, Colin, that you are assuming a strong link between chess grades and some non-chess accomplishments. But are mere grades the proper measure of our written contributions?

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 3823
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Apr 04, 2014 9:35 am

"1. Grades and ratings are a reflection of a person's playing strength and competitiveness under match conditions. Nothing more."

Grades and ratings are a reflection of a person's results, not ability.

MSoszynski
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:43 pm

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by MSoszynski » Fri Apr 04, 2014 2:12 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:"1. Grades and ratings are a reflection of a person's playing strength and competitiveness under match conditions. Nothing more."

Grades and ratings are a reflection of a person's results, not ability.
Is this a quibble?

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2234
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Gradings to be published, on the sidebar?

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Apr 04, 2014 2:22 pm

When I first saw this I thought it was another April Fool gag but the date is wrong and it's too long.

I know when a new poster appears there is a flurry of activity to find the posters grade
to see if he is worthy to make a comment. I remember reading on here once someone asking
a lad who was standing for a local chess office (a league sec?) how many chess books he had?

Who is going to keep updating the grades or are our names linked to the grading list?

Why stop at grades, how about qualifications, sexual persuasion and blood group.

Geoff Chandler, 1999, NM, GCE's, ZBE, VD (and scar), celebate, O-Negative.

Post Reply