![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: anand, destroys, radjabov |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"EZoto" wrote in message
news:8c3b028c42fae4993f7e7894d6c41074@TeraNews... 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 In the venacular sports talk radio, no one simply "wins" or "loses," they "destroy" or "crush" their opponent, who in turn "chokes." Some people apparently want to bring this to chess. -T |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.. |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Radjabov Destroys Anand | Scott | rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) | 9 | August 9th 03 11:15 AM |
| Radjabov Destroys Anand | Scott | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 16 | August 9th 03 11:15 AM |
| Dortmund: 1-st sensation! | Isidor Gunsberg | rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) | 0 | August 2nd 03 01:12 AM |
| Dortmund: 1-st sensation! | KRCH | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 1 | August 2nd 03 01:12 AM |