- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

How many women have beaten super-GMs?

Grenke Chess Open 2019: Alireza Firouzja (2759) - Antonia Ziegenfuss (2101) (0-1)

Grenke Chess Open 2019: Alireza Firouzja (2759) - Antonia Ziegenfuss (2101) (0-1)

I like the thumbnail

I like the thumbnail

Judit was a super GM herself, what an absolute monster

Judit was a super GM herself, what an absolute monster

@hamnet1723 said in #2:

Grenke Chess Open 2019: Alireza Firouzja (2759) - Antonia Ziegenfuss (2101) (0-1)
I checked I think Firouzja's rating was 2669 at the time so not above 2700, still very impressive though

@hamnet1723 said in #2: > Grenke Chess Open 2019: Alireza Firouzja (2759) - Antonia Ziegenfuss (2101) (0-1) I checked I think Firouzja's rating was 2669 at the time so not above 2700, still very impressive though

great success. for them

great success. for them

Nice analysis but I don't get the "points of interest" section at all. Seems like a very odd way to structure tournaments designed to optimize this one specific metric.

Nice analysis but I don't get the "points of interest" section at all. Seems like a very odd way to structure tournaments designed to optimize this one specific metric.

@NatalijaFirenkova said in #7:

Nice analysis but I don't get the "points of interest" section at all. Seems like a very odd way to structure tournaments designed to optimize this one specific metric.

I agree, but I think most people tend to like tournaments like Gibraltar for more reasons than just this metric.

@NatalijaFirenkova said in #7: > Nice analysis but I don't get the "points of interest" section at all. Seems like a very odd way to structure tournaments designed to optimize this one specific metric. I agree, but I think most people tend to like tournaments like Gibraltar for more reasons than just this metric.

has there been population dynamics studis about tournament specific formats parameters about the tier thresholds and within tier size and mixing properties..

the enveloppe shape of the funnellilng and tiering in relation to within strate populatino sizes and amount of "mixing"

by mixing I might mean how much anyone meets anyone often enough....

all parameters discussed. I know that is not likely. and might be science-fiction but I am just asking the question, a too rarefied set up might have initial cohort conditions effects, besides transient group categories not in direct competitions (mixing) per the tournament ELO distribution "flow" over many tounrnaments.

I have no clue if I even made any sense, given my ignorance of the specific of that part of chess world.

I just wonder about the time scale about how initial group boundaries with regard to amount of pairing uniform "mixing" (some measure I would not yet know which would make sense either, get to lose memory of initial group boundary side.

it does not have to be women.. but given the cultural and recent cultural changes (am I mistaken) about mores and gender expectation and non-board social mixity obstacles etc.. don't want to put finger in "controversial" questions here, but this blog is not either, and it seems to have some questions about subpopulation representations according to some criteria of mixture given the type of ELO thresholds that have community "impact". sorry for the quotes.. that is prudence gvien my ignorance, but I am still curious about such issues. not just in this case.

the more generali questino might be about actual chess skills sets gaps and how much within pool complementary gaps competition might slow down ELO stat evolution when population increases, and trajectories of leanrning/experine/repertoire specializations diverge to create diversity of board features or skill set might happen.

ok I hope i made some sense. getting late, and tired. but the more general quesiton is an old question of mine. perhaps not formulated well enough in this iteration.

I found the blog internesting question, and given my ignorance, informative. about more than the objectibve question(s), even.

has there been population dynamics studis about tournament specific formats parameters about the tier thresholds and within tier size and mixing properties.. the enveloppe shape of the funnellilng and tiering in relation to within strate populatino sizes and amount of "mixing" by mixing I might mean how much anyone meets anyone often enough.... all parameters discussed. I know that is not likely. and might be science-fiction but I am just asking the question, a too rarefied set up might have initial cohort conditions effects, besides transient group categories not in direct competitions (mixing) per the tournament ELO distribution "flow" over many tounrnaments. I have no clue if I even made any sense, given my ignorance of the specific of that part of chess world. I just wonder about the time scale about how initial group boundaries with regard to amount of pairing uniform "mixing" (some measure I would not yet know which would make sense either, get to lose memory of initial group boundary side. it does not have to be women.. but given the cultural and recent cultural changes (am I mistaken) about mores and gender expectation and non-board social mixity obstacles etc.. don't want to put finger in "controversial" questions here, but this blog is not either, and it seems to have some questions about subpopulation representations according to some criteria of mixture given the type of ELO thresholds that have community "impact". sorry for the quotes.. that is prudence gvien my ignorance, but I am still curious about such issues. not just in this case. the more generali questino might be about actual chess skills sets gaps and how much within pool complementary gaps competition might slow down ELO stat evolution when population increases, and trajectories of leanrning/experine/repertoire specializations diverge to create diversity of board features or skill set might happen. ok I hope i made some sense. getting late, and tired. but the more general quesiton is an old question of mine. perhaps not formulated well enough in this iteration. I found the blog internesting question, and given my ignorance, informative. about more than the objectibve question(s), even.

Okay okay, apparently at Aruba 1992, GM Julio Granda Zuniga got beat by not one, not two, but all three Polgar sisters. Ohhhh no that's worse than getting adopted

This is the funniest shit I've seen all day.

Okay okay, apparently at Aruba 1992, GM Julio Granda Zuniga got beat by not one, not two, but all three Polgar sisters. Ohhhh no that's worse than getting adopted This is the funniest shit I've seen all day.