Radjabov is amazing! He wiped Kasparov off the board and now Anand!

What a great way to start his chess career!


http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1091

-Scott

Ok, fine, I know ... but that doesn't make him any less cool! :-P

-Scott




Radjabov is amazing! He wiped Kasparov off the board and now Anand!

Uh, he didn't wipe either off the board, look at the games.

John Fernandez

What are you? Radjabov's press agent? The games don't show Anand or
Kasparov getting wiped off the board. If your in charge of public
relations then Radjabov should fire you quickly. Looks more like
Anand and Kasparov lost rather than Radjabov won.

EZoto

Scott wrote:
What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine?


With a 2600+ rating his skill is "genuine" enough. But to be able to
rationally say with some confidence that he is better than the top five
the answer is really quite simple. All he has to win enough games to
get his rating higher than theirs.

Two wins against the best won't make it. He also lost today to another
2600 player, so we get to consider that, too. At least if we are
sensible we do.

I agree with Scott, Radjabov isn't frightened of going into sharp positions
where his illustrious opponents are likely to make an error.
Alan

"Scott" wrote in message
m...
What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine? Oh, wait, I get it - Kasparov and Anand were
both sick and had little sleep those days - I understand now . . .

-Scott



What are you? Radjabov's press agent? The games don't show Anand or
Kasparov getting wiped off the board. If your in charge of public
relations then Radjabov should fire you quickly. Looks more like
Anand and Kasparov lost rather than Radjabov won.

EZoto

On 3 Aug 2003 18:19:33 -0700, (Scott) wrote:

What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine? Oh, wait, I get it - Kasparov and Anand were
both sick and had little sleep those days - I understand now . . .

Who says his skill isn't genuine? The games your showing are double
edged and could have gone either way. Anand could have won that game.
You make it sound like Anand was totally outplayed with no chance.
Kramnik beat him. No one is making a big deal about it now are they?

EZoto

Ed Seedhouse wrote in message .ca...
Scott wrote:
What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine?


With a 2600+ rating his skill is "genuine" enough. But to be able to
rationally say with some confidence that he is better than the top five
the answer is really quite simple. All he has to win enough games to
get his rating higher than theirs.

Two wins against the best won't make it. He also lost today to another
2600 player, so we get to consider that, too. At least if we are
sensible we do.

Right. I want to say that I was impressed by Radjabov's draw against
Leko today (8/7) though. He showed a lot of tenacity in that game.

LT

(Scott) wrote in message om...
Radjabov is amazing! He wiped Kasparov off the board and now Anand!

What a great way to start his chess career!


http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1091


For the benefit of Jai Maharaj, this should have been posted as

RADJABOV DESTROYS ANAND!


-Scott

Robert Hyatt wrote:

In rec.games.chess.computer Larry Tapper wrote:
Ed Seedhouse wrote in message .ca...
Scott wrote:
What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine?


With a 2600+ rating his skill is "genuine" enough. But to be able to
rationally say with some confidence that he is better than the top five
the answer is really quite simple. All he has to win enough games to
get his rating higher than theirs.

Two wins against the best won't make it. He also lost today to another
2600 player, so we get to consider that, too. At least if we are
sensible we do.

Right. I want to say that I was impressed by Radjabov's draw against
Leko today (8/7) though. He showed a lot of tenacity in that game.

LT

Give Leko credit for making a mistake or two as well. It was probably
winnable

What's your game 'turkey-arse'? You been on usenet long enough, you
white-coat, cut the crass-posting Southern idiot..

michael adams wrote:

Robert Hyatt wrote:

In rec.games.chess.computer Larry Tapper wrote:
Ed Seedhouse wrote in message .ca...
Scott wrote:
What is the difference between Kasparov and Anand losing vs. Radjabov
winning How many "lucky" games does he have to win for you to see
his skill as genuine?


With a 2600+ rating his skill is "genuine" enough. But to be able to
rationally say with some confidence that he is better than the top five
the answer is really quite simple. All he has to win enough games to
get his rating higher than theirs.

Two wins against the best won't make it. He also lost today to another
2600 player, so we get to consider that, too. At least if we are
sensible we do.

Right. I want to say that I was impressed by Radjabov's draw against
Leko today (8/7) though. He showed a lot of tenacity in that game.

LT

Give Leko credit for making a mistake or two as well. It was probably
winnable

What's your game 'turkey-arse'? You been on usenet long enough, you
white-coat, cut the crass-posting, Southern idiot..