A Chess forum. ChessBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mig Migged



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 8th 03, 01:54 PM
Sam Sloan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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



  #2  
Old July 8th 03, 04:35 PM
Don Shennum
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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



  #3  
Old July 8th 03, 04:44 PM
The Masked Bishop
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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



  #4  
Old July 8th 03, 05:00 PM
Joshua B. Lilly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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



  #5  
Old July 8th 03, 07:39 PM
chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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.


  #6  
Old July 8th 03, 07:55 PM
KidDon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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
  #7  
Old July 8th 03, 10:19 PM
joe mccarron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

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

  #8  
Old July 9th 03, 04:59 PM
Angelo DePalma
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged


I used to play bridge online with a guy who was on the Argentine national
team. He claimed to be a very good chess player too -- in fact, he told me
his FIDE was 2300. So I booked an online chess session with him even though
I looked him up and couldn't find anything on him at the Argentine CF site.
When I beat him at G/30 (I'm 1900-ish) I was certain he was full of it.

I've read just about everything Mig has written (or that has been written
about him) in the last 3-4 years, and have even had several email exchanges
with him about politics (don't go there, as they say!). I seem to recall a
couple of times where he was referred to as a 2200 or 2300 FIDE player, but
he never said so himself. His USCF rating does not suggest he was ever
(within the past 40 years) a 2300 player. Maybe he was a legit 2100 player
who has become rusty and was being ultra-ethical by telling Bill G. that his
rating was 2300. If so I salute him. I doubt anyone (except for Gary Hart)
would be so cavalier about being "caught" because of Mig is really a low-A
player, it would certainly come out if he played!

Angelo DePalma

"joe mccarron" wrote in message
om...
1)Did he in fact have the equivalent of a masters rating in Argentina?



  #9  
Old July 8th 03, 11:06 PM
StanB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged


"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


  #10  
Old July 9th 03, 09:36 AM
Mig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mig Migged

Ah, cool, some evidence! Must be more telling than my actual ICC
rating. I've logged all my ICC games for years and found exactly two
against "StanB," both from 1999. Both 3 0 unrated. (My rating in these
games was 2512, his 1656. As with most players my ICC blitz rating has
fluctuated between 2200 and 2500, often on the same night. ) In one
game I was up a piece and then left a rook en prise in a typical net
pre-move slip. In the other I won a pawn and then a rook endgame. So I
guess you're the expert on my chess strength? Bad enough trying to
evaluate on one tournament, but two ICC blitz games from four years
ago?

Is this what this Usenet group has sunk to? A bunch of me toos? A
bunch of chest-beaters with Spam Scone as an idol? Glad to see a few
people actually posting chess and some common sense, but even they end
up being dragged down into the pit.



On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 18:06:16 -0400, "StanB"
wrote:


"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


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mig Migged (... Sloan, ¿sloaned?) Antonio Torrecillas rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 4 July 13th 03 01:05 AM
Mig Migged StanB rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 5 July 9th 03 12:47 PM
Mig Migged Mig rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 1 July 9th 03 12:35 PM
Mig Migged John Macnab rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 1 July 8th 03 09:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.