The 1999 can become a 2000 if he beats a 2000 in one game--this also drops the 2000 such that the two essentially swap places (and possibly bodies?).
Loaded metaphysics you unpackage with such a question.
How is a 2000 different from a 1999?
Sort:
newengland7 wrote:
The 1999 can become a 2000 if he beats a 2000 in one game--this also drops the 2000 such that the two essentially swap places (and possibly bodies?).
Loaded metaphysics you unpackage with such a question.
The metaphysics part is interesting, but from just a chess ratings perspective, isn't that sort of like saying, "If Tyson Gay ran half a second quicker and Usain Bolt half a second slower, then Tyson Gay would beat Usain Bolt?" It's true, but it's not really saing anything. What would Tyson Gay have to do to run half a second quicker, and what would Usain Bolt have to do wrong to run half a second slower?
Is one suffering the conseuquences of old age faster? For instance, perhaps Tyson Gay times his take-off from the starting line one race better than Usain Bolt thus gaining a second on Bolt and beating Bolt by half a second.
And if Bolt should suffer the consequences of old age prior to Gay, then Gay could gain another second on Bolt.
newengland7 wrote:
Is one suffering the conseuquences of old age faster? For instance, perhaps Tyson Gay times his take-off from the starting line one race better than Usain Bolt thus gaining a second on Bolt and beating Bolt by half a second.
And if Bolt should suffer the consequences of old age prior to Gay, then Gay could gain another second on Bolt.
I see... so you're saying that the 1999 can beat the 2000 if the latter is in decline due to old age?
Or if the 2000 mis-timed his leap off the start line. Or collapsed of dehydration before the finish line.
The 2000 player is pressured to win due to the fact that he is in the 2000s and is a master while the 1999 is in the 1900s. He is so inclined to win that he takes unnecessary risks and tries too hard to win. Then he ends up losing due to these mistakes and the 1999 becomes a master and the cycle repeats itself forever.
macer75 wrote:
I know that a 2000-rated player is better than a 1999, but what exactly is it that makes him better? Is the 2000 better at seeing tactics? Does he blunder less? Or, to put it in general terms, how or why does a 2000 think differently from a 1999, and what does the 1999 have to do to cross the elusive 2000 barrier?
The 2000 will be very slightly better at every aspect of the game than the 1999. All these microscopic superiorities combine together to make the 2000 player way better than the 1999. To cross the 2000 barrier the 1999 player can play exclusively against 1998 rated opponents and win every game using his huge microscopic superiority over the 1998 player and he will eventually break 2000.
No.
yeah i agree with etc
The difference between a 2000 and a 1999 is there is roughly a year age gap. Also one of them is going to party like its 1999 : ( )
lol
you copied my 'how is a 2000 different from a 1100' right...?
ThirdCultureKid wrote:
you copied my 'how is a 2000 different from a 1100' right...?
It's an honor to be noticed by the OP of the original!
xD
the 2000 uses engines which are faster than the 1999.
1999 is in the 20th century
2000 is 21st century
difference between 2000 and 1999 = 2000-1999 = 1
I know that a 2000-rated player is better than a 1999, but what exactly is it that makes him better? Is the 2000 better at seeing tactics? Does he blunder less? Or, to put it in general terms, how or why does a 2000 think differently from a 1999, and what does the 1999 have to do to cross the elusive 2000 barrier?