It is fine to have a opinion and express it. But to turn it to promotion of yourself and your own son is bad taste. ( By the way, did you read his piece where he congratulated Yeoh Li Tian's recent success in Brunei and in the same paragraph try to instill the notion that it was due to his "methods"? We have been doing preparation for our opponents since we learnt to play chess. Tagging a fanciful name onto that does not make it new or different or "your methods". Li Tian's success belongs to himself and his father)
Let me say that I do not know Mark at all, he probably is a good kid. But since he has been used as an example on his father's post, I have no choice to use that as a rebuttal. As a result, I will probably be accused of attacking juniors (again).
Now in this article, Raymond posts a link showing Mark at the top of the table in the 2010 National Junior. And just in case we missed it the first time, he posts it again three paragraphs down.
Let me post the latest FIDE rating list here.
If you check the crosstable in Raymond's link, you will find three names on the FIDE list. They are Sumant, Zhuo Ren and Li Tian. You do not see Mark because Mark is number 59 on this list. Ostensibly, he uses this as proof that ratings are useless. So this is a clue why that article was written.
What Raymond is trying to fool you with is that the FIDE ratings are not accurate reflection of strength because two years ago Mark was ahead of these three. Mark was leading the tournament at that point in time. Mark is their equal and possibly their superior as well.
Now my take is this. Raymond has always said in his old postings that past results are not to be counted on to measure current strength. So why take a tournament from two years ago to validate his point?
Why show a tournament result in the middle of the tournament when his son is leading? Why not show everyone the final standings? Let me show you what Raymond does not want to show you. Check the two images below to see what is been spinned.
 |
| What Raymond wants you to see (round 8 standings) |
 |
| The reality which Raymond does not show (final standings) |
Another thing, why not take the latest National Junior which is 2011? Why 2010? It took me a while to track down the 2011 tournament result. I finally found it at Haslinda's blog.
 |
| 2011 NJ Final standings |
I wrote before in an old post, juniors are always improving. Their capacity to learn is tremendous compared to someone say in their twenties or thirties. In the 2010 National Junior, Li Tian only came in 7th, but in the recent Brunei Campomanes Memorial, he was holding and beating GMs and IMs and came within an inch of an IM norm. His current rating is over 2200 and ranked seventh in Malaysia based on that. This is how far he has improved since 2010.
Ratings have always been an indicator of a player's strength. Chess organizers of famous and traditional strong tournaments always look at the FIDE rating list as a guide who to invite for their super tournaments. There is even a live rating web site where ratings are daily calculated and posted, such is the interest in chess ratings.
Answer me this. If "your methods" are so effective why is your greatest (and possibly only) student ranked 59th in the country?
Update: Did you see Raymond's so called "reply" post? What reply? He is just sidestepping the points raised in my post and trying to throw up smoke screens to confuse everyone. He says he had "written extensively on how one can fatten ratings just for show". I have a good memory. He merely claimed that one could choose tournaments to compete in to increase ratings. Once he has claimed, it becomes a fact that he will refer to constantly later in his diatribes. This is always his modus operandi. Nice trick but no cigar. Next his "We are not interested in that". This is called sour grapes."FGM is only interested in meeting fat cows in tournament in a clean fight", in other words means FGM has nothing to lose when his lowly rated player meet others highly rated players.
'Nuff said!
8 comments:
Aiyah you, why you attack people and their training methods again? Later he will say, "If my methods are not working, then why bother to attack me? That means it is working!!!" His logic is world class. He is the master of thinking because he can think like no one else in this world.
To add another point, I can't believe he keeps harping on Zhuo Ren's one failure (SEA Games selection). Zhuo Ren has won the National Junior and National Closed. That is 2 tournaments that he has done better than Sumant. Not to take any credit away from Sumant, but no one can perform well at every single tournament.
To top it off, the National Junior No.2 was achieved based on tie-break. While in name is National No.2, the failure to improve on the results in 2011 show that the method has failed? Or maybe someone else's methods are superior?
Back to the rating list. I must say that using a snapshot of a rating list is a bit unfair. I think the better measure would be to measure the change in ratings over time. But then again, he will just tell you that ratings don't matter. He does not emphasize the importance of ratings, that is why Mark has not been gaining rating points.
Instead of bragging about the FGM's lousy training methods, Raymond should be asking about what is lacking when comparing his method with Chin Seng's methods? Isn't there a huge difference? This is the big elephant in the room. You can talk about how good your method is all day when you compare yourself against people who perform worse than you. But a real man compares himself with those who are better. I want to see that kind of analysis by Raymond. But then to expect that, I think I would have to be dreaming in my dreams.
I told you already this person is with Delusion of Grandeur!!!
Ninja, I already wrote a post on warped logic ,was going to post it tomorrow. you pre-empted me with your first paragraph. Darn.
1a. many years back in Jax's center, he was a humble parent.
1b. I shared with him chess training not just about pieces & board.
1c. It covers non chess factors such as the well
known "prepare for your opponent", etc, etc.
1d. now he claimed as his copyright
2a. I know i will soon be accused as a liar.
2b. but that doesnt change the fact in (1) above
3a. American :"we invented the moving staircase"
3b. English: "BUT WE INVENTED THE TERM - ESCALATOR"
seng
You are free to make your opinion here. But no foul language is allowed.
Wah, resorting to foul language from u know who.
Like on RS's blog, only compliments allowed 8-)
I guess u have done your strong counter-attack against his unsound sacrifice. Nice reply to him!
Post a Comment