Insanity and chess ratings

Yes. As an animal spieces we have different individuals but expected/average values to many characteristics (number of chromosomes, puberty's age, neural activity under some circunstances, etc.), but there are always people that diverge from the average (numerically up or down).
Are you talking about chess ratings or insanity?
Both.

But I'm only speaking of everyday life insane, HilarioFJunior. Like how we non-professionals judge insanity:)

But I'm only speaking of everyday life insane, HilarioFJunior. Like how we non-professionals judge insanity:)
Well, that doesn't affect the core of the discussion. But since you're talking about insanity defined by common sense, you should talk about chess ratings on the same way. Like "oh, that player win all the games against us, so he's surely better", but without a statistic model...
But regardless of the analysis' formality I think you're right. We tend to define the exceptionality of others based on the average, not on intrinsic features of the system. For example, a GM could say "I still can't understand chess", while a group of amateurs would say "he (the GM) understands everything about chess. We understand something".

So basically we're judging how insane people are to us based upon the pool of people we've known. I imagine that there are people who cheat. That they act insane to get a higher rating. But they're perfectly capable of rational thought, and it's probably their confidence in being rational at will which enables them to delve into insanity for some kind of self-pleasure.

But I'm only speaking of everyday life insane, HilarioFJunior. Like how we non-professionals judge insanity:)
Well, that doesn't affect the core of the discussion. But since you're talking about insanity defined by common sense, you should talk about chess ratings on the same way. Like "oh, that player win all the games against us, so he's surely better", but without a statistic model...
But regardless of the analysis' formality I think you're right. We tend to define the exceptionality of others based on the average, not on intrinsic features of the system. For example, a GM could say "I still can't understand chess", while a group of amateurs would say "he (the GM) understands everything about chess. We understand something".
That's interesting, Hilario! Let me think about it:)

Well, that doesn't affect the core of the discussion. But since you're talking about insanity defined by common sense, you should talk about chess ratings on the same way. Like "oh, that player win all the games against us, so he's surely better", but without a statistic model...
Do you think we need a "statistical model" for our own judgements of who is insane? Like do we need to compare them with Hitler or just some random person we know who's loopy?

Columbus came ashore greeted with nothing but niceness
Sailing west in attempt to find gold and spices
When they touched ground, they were greeted by the Arawak
Columbus had them locked up as prisoners in an hour flat
He wanted to find their source of gold and that was that
And when they though that wasn't fair then he stabbed their back
When there was no more gold he took slaves instead
And left a quarter million Indians in Haiti dead
Insanity rating: American hero

True true true. American heroes, even if they're Spanish, are examples of some of the highest recorded ratings of insanity that I have personally read about

insanity is the only way pdela can be grandmaster.
I like to think of pdela using an insanity engine;)

i think good chessplayers tend to be much more sane than average. they might have issues socializing with the insane masses but what sane person wouldnt?
True, socializing with everyone who is potentially insane is a difficult problem our mothers never quite warned us about. Perhaps it's because having children is a sure sign of insanity? But my views are bias there;)

i think good chessplayers tend to be much more sane than average. they might have issues socializing with the insane masses but what sane person wouldnt?
True, socializing with everyone who is potentially insane is a difficult problem our mothers never quite warned us about. Perhaps it's because having children is a sure sign of insanity? But my views are bias there;)
Perhaps?!!!
I would think that 'self-insanity' judgements are not really recognized. Just like chess, you really can't trust how people rate themselves;)