tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425351124534703499.post1555405409897864721..comments2023-10-03T19:37:03.603+08:00Comments on Chess is Chess: Dubai 1986 our best performance!Jimmy Liewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03949363653282906421noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425351124534703499.post-73969925307306196652010-10-09T17:38:07.431+08:002010-10-09T17:38:07.431+08:00Let me answer you point by point.
"Then at t...Let me answer you point by point.<br /><br />"Then at the end, you said you cannot compare how the players in 1986 would fare against the players in 2006."<br /><br />This kind of scenario have been argued many times before, I already gave some scenarios. And the reason is nothing to do with rating. Its the number of games played since 1986 , advances in computers that give current Jimmy Liewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03949363653282906421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425351124534703499.post-61016544163194751892010-10-09T15:59:29.047+08:002010-10-09T15:59:29.047+08:00Don't you think you're being a little unfa...Don't you think you're being a little unfair here Jimmy? First you compare the ratings of people in 2006 and in 1986 for inflation. Then at the end, you said you cannot compare how the players in 1986 would fare against the players in 2006. <br /><br />To define rating inflation properly before I expound my argument, let us hopefully agree that rating inflation means that a player with The Chess Ninjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913044279092928324noreply@blogger.com