One of the great debates of Our Modern Times has been the chess
strength of Mig, whose real name is Michael Greengard.

Everyone agrees that Mig is a talented writer about chess. His
articles are popular and have been read and published everywhere,
including ChessBase magazine and TWIC.

Mig also was Director of KasparovChess during its heyday.

However, Mig often puts on airs about being a chess master. When
somebody discovered that he has an old USCF rating of 1743, the
question came up as to whether this was really the same person and
whether it was likely that an adult could improve that much in a short
period of time.

Mig played in the World Open last week and now we have the answer. It
seems that the real chess stength of MIG is no better than about 1800.
He is certainly not a master.

http://www.64.com/uscf/ratings/12525629

MIG finished the tournament with a score of 3-6 which placed him
number 181. His losses were primarily to experts and to one player
rated 1990. His wins were primarily against 1500-1600 players.

The tournament wall chart showed Mig as having a rating of 2300. I
asked Bill Goichberg about this. Goichberg said that it is not against
the rules for a player to claim to be stronger than he really is. It
is only against the rules for a player to claim to be weaker than he
really is, so that he can try to win a class prize. Mig entered the
tournament claiming to have a rating of 2300 in Argentina, where he
lived for several years. That self-rating was accepted at the World
Open and Mig was paired according to that.

MIG's results show that a rating in the range of 1700 or 1800 is about
right for Mig.

Sam Sloan

Gunny Bunny wrote:
Mig was on ICC with a GM rating. It was proven that he was using a Computer
Software program to boost his rating. In other words, (C)heating !!

This proves nothing of the kind.

I think it was rather brave of Mig to play under these circumstances; he
takes more than his share of public scorn over his putative
chess-playing skill. I suspect that he expected to play 2300 chess.
Hopefully he'll make more public appearances and stabilize his rating in
one class or another.

John

I directed him at the People's Chess Tournament, in Berkeley, CA about
5 years ago. He played in the class B section, and he nay have won
some prize money.

Regards,
Don Shennum

The only problem I've ever noticed about Mig is an ego the size of the
Ukraine. A fine chess writer, yes (although the competition is mightly
thin), but oh, the persona. There are fewer things less grand than being
Mig, it seems.

TMB

I haven`t noticed a large ego. I love his articles, though, often
informative and almost always funny, sometimes mildly, sometimes downright
hilarious.

For playing strength, he may be a better blitz player than slower time
controls. I watched him actually have a winning position against a GM in a
blitz game a couple of weeks ago on the Fritz server, his play (considering
the time control) was pretty impressive. Blitz isn`t a measure of true
playing strength, of course, but GMs are no pushovers, even at those speeds.
But I`m not a good judge of that, I`m just barely an OTB C player, and far
worse at blitz.

I don`t pay to read his articles, and neither does anyone else here as far
as I know. I`ve never understood people who insult those who give benefit
to the chess culture.

- Joshua B. Lilly



"The Masked Bishop" wrote in message
.com...
The only problem I've ever noticed about Mig is an ego the size of the
Ukraine. A fine chess writer, yes (although the competition is mightly
thin), but oh, the persona. There are fewer things less grand than being
Mig, it seems.

TMB

I asked Bill Goichberg about this. Goichberg said that it is not against
the rules for a player to claim to be stronger than he really is.


Wouldn't this kind of screw up the ratings a little bit? For instance, if I
started entering my club tourneys as a 2800, my club would soon have the
highest concentration of super-GMs in the world.

chris wrote:
I asked Bill Goichberg about this. Goichberg said that
it is not against
the rules for a player to claim to be stronger than he really is.

Wouldn't this kind of screw up the ratings a little bit?
For instance, if I
started entering my club tourneys as a 2800, my club would
soon have the
highest concentration of super-GMs in the world.
___________________________________________
It doesn't directly "screw up the ratings" because the USCF doesn't care
what you claim your rating is; it will rate the games based on your real
rating. It can screw up the pairings, which can have a more indirect
effect on ratings. It will not, however, create a "concentration of
super-GMs" by any stretch.

KidDon
--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:18:55 GMT, John Macnab
wrote:

Gunny Bunny wrote:
Mig was on ICC with a GM rating. It was proven that he was using a Computer
Software program to boost his rating. In other words, (C)heating !!

This proves nothing of the kind.

I think it was rather brave of Mig to play under these circumstances; he
takes more than his share of public scorn over his putative
chess-playing skill. I suspect that he expected to play 2300 chess.
Hopefully he'll make more public appearances and stabilize his rating in
one class or another.

Anyway ratings are a measure of performance and not of chess
knowledge. It is well known that some players play well below their
chess knowledge. A good example was Nimzovich, whose nervousness
probably prevented him from the world championship. He once cried out
after a loss"Why do I have to lose to this idiot?". LOL

A player who is out of practice will play way below his normal
strength, and one who is not in good physical shape will tend to
blunder away lost games due to lack of stamina. And so on.

So who cares if Mig's rating is lower han he claims? I judge his
columns by their quality. There are plenty of 2400 players who can't
write a good column.Mig can.

Henri

It shouldn't be a big deal what his rating is. However, if he is in
fact claiming he is a master when he is really 1800ish that is a bit
over the top. I find it hard to believe anyone who hasn't played
rated chess in years and when they did had a 1700ish rating would
claim such a thing.

2 questions:

1)Did he in fact have the equivalent of a masters rating in Argentina?

2) What exactly did he do to "put on airs about being a chess master?"

I think there are allot of reasons to ask to be rated as a 2300 at the
world open that are not fraudulent. However was there anything where
he indicated this in advertising his coaching program?

As far as his writing he is very funny and offers a lot to the chess
world (which I think is straved of beneficial personalities.)

As far as ego I'm not sure. I do think he was a bit critical of some
1200 rated game in this article:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=973

Especially when talking about the all but hanging bishop they both
missed. I wondered why he didn't write the time controls for the game
down. But again other than this(small gripe) I don't see him as
arrogant at all. If he has a problem it is that he is a sycophant to
the strong grandmasters he reports on esp. Kasparov. But that is just
MHO.



(Sam Sloan) wrote in message ...
One of the great debates of Our Modern Times has been the chess
strength of Mig, whose real name is Michael Greengard.

Everyone agrees that Mig is a talented writer about chess. His
articles are popular and have been read and published everywhere,
including ChessBase magazine and TWIC.

Mig also was Director of KasparovChess during its heyday.

However, Mig often puts on airs about being a chess master. When
somebody discovered that he has an old USCF rating of 1743, the
question came up as to whether this was really the same person and
whether it was likely that an adult could improve that much in a short
period of time.

Mig played in the World Open last week and now we have the answer. It
seems that the real chess stength of MIG is no better than about 1800.
He is certainly not a master.

http://www.64.com/uscf/ratings/12525629

MIG finished the tournament with a score of 3-6 which placed him
number 181. His losses were primarily to experts and to one player
rated 1990. His wins were primarily against 1500-1600 players.

The tournament wall chart showed Mig as having a rating of 2300. I
asked Bill Goichberg about this. Goichberg said that it is not against
the rules for a player to claim to be stronger than he really is. It
is only against the rules for a player to claim to be weaker than he
really is, so that he can try to win a class prize. Mig entered the
tournament claiming to have a rating of 2300 in Argentina, where he
lived for several years. That self-rating was accepted at the World
Open and Mig was paired according to that.

MIG's results show that a rating in the range of 1700 or 1800 is about
right for Mig.

Sam Sloan

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...

MIG's results show that a rating in the range of 1700 or 1800 is about
right for Mig.

Having played him several times on ICC I would put it at about 1700-1900.

StanB