out of curiousity, which interpretation is it that you think i made, which you consider misleading?

for instance, i never said or implied the following:

<to use such numbers to say "he's not that good" is perhaps slightly wrong.>

slomarko's 4 latest posts on this page:

<Sep-11-08
Magnus Carlsen
slomarko: -yawn- >

<Sep-11-08
Magnus Carlsen
slomarko: and what does <Etienne> think about this new feature?>

<Sep-11-08
Magnus Carlsen
slomarko: <Etienne: "and what does <Etienne> think about this new feature?" Depends, who am I supposed to be the double account of? Because I'd have to have the same opinion, no? Unless I give a contrary opinion, just to make look like I am someone else? Oh what conspiracies!

But you might go on and look stupid as much as you like, you're used to it anyways.>

come on Etienne write again what you think about rating inflation. it was so convincing the first time hehehehe>

<Sep-12-08
Magnus Carlsen
slomarko: i hope today we are gonna talk about Carlsen's games. i'm tired of reading off-topic material here like for examle frogbert's talk about the features he implements on his webpage. what does that have to do with M.Carlsen???>

woody wood pusher's 6 latest posts on this page:

<Aug-11-08
Magnus Carlsen
Woody Wood Pusher: Rating inflation is massive today, it is obvious to everyone. Do you really think there are a score of players like Fischer at his best out there today? LMAO>

<Aug-11-08
Magnus Carlsen
Woody Wood Pusher: Thanks but I already understand the rating system and how it works, I was laughing at some of the ridiculous conclusions which are inevitably reached if you accept the description of the system by a few people on this site.>

<Aug-12-08
Magnus Carlsen
Woody Wood Pusher: leave slomarko alone I like his posts, this would be a dull page without him. >

<Sep-09-08
Magnus Carlsen
Woody Wood Pusher: Carlsen is doing great, imagine breaking 2800 this year.....OMG >

<Sep-10-08
Magnus Carlsen
Woody Wood Pusher: Carlsen has gone from top of the class to the 'naughty corner' within 2 games.... >

<Sep-12-08 Woody Wood Pusher: <slomarko><i'm tired of reading off-topic material > It's a shame he isn't tired of writing it.>

---

this "thread" started when i posted a link to a graph about carlsen's (and moro's) rating performance profile and rating gain profile over the last 18 months, and obviously i explained how the graph should be read.

off-topic? hardly.

you have *yawned*, accused etienne for double accounts (again), and ranted about off-topicness.

on-topic? hardly. are you or i responsible for your posts, slomarko?

In the Dragon game vs Topalov, I do think Carlsen was successful with his a6. He managed to get Topalov into his home prep, and got a lead on the clock. The difficulties Topalov faced and had to overcome, required perhaps ~2750 level of play.

Carlsen played 22...Th8 so fast, that I assumed he was still in his home prep at this point, and if so, he blundered on his "first move" with

23. b3 Tc6?

Tc6 threw the game away IMO. If playing a top 5, particularly Topalov, you can't give him the initiative like that, and expect to survive.

So, a6 wasn't really the problem here, it looked more as sloppy homework by Carlsen, b3 was a very natural looking move. With his previous game record against Topa, it's understandable to take risks, it was almost like he felt Topa would start to play less optimal moves soon.

off-topic? hardly.>

thats debatable to say the least. for example what have posts like these have to do with M.Carlsen?

<frogbert: zarg, i plan to give users the option to select one player to compare against, and then it obviously will be plotted in the same graph, and without the extra info ("noise") in the background. that's just using two different "datasets" in the same graph, and comes at basically no extra cost.

the library is an early version of the php-library IMAGE_GRAPH, part of PEAR. i'm actually using the predecessor graphpite from 2004/2005, as it was a slightly lighter install. but it has some bugs and shortcomings, so i might choose to switch to the full-fledged image_graph in pear some time in the future.>

or

<frogbert: rolfo, at least _some_ types of information/facts can make certain futile discussions go away. :o)

<slomarko: whats GOTD ?>

complaining about off-topicness simply because someone answers a question related to a previous on-topic posting, is rather pointless, imo. and you clearly don't care a bit about conforming to that yourself.

or in this exchange:

<kib1>: "i think carlsen misplayed that dragon yesterday"

<kib2>: "in my experience, it's important to achieve [bla bla bla] when you play the dragon. for example, what do you think about this example: [bla bla bla]?

<kib1>: "i think that is [bla bla bla].

here, <kib2> is "off topic", because he/she doesn't talk about/mention carlsen.

and <kib1> is "off topic" in his/her 2nd post because he/she only talks about some chess position that did not occur in any carlsen game.

that's an utterly useless "definition" of being off-topic.

--

here's the simple solution, slomarko: just keep your mouth shut when someone discusses something that doesn't interest you. if you desperately need to do something, then bother the admins with some whistle blowing on the posts you don't enjoy.

i never blow the whistle behind others' back like a rat!

Carlsen giving weak pawns odds, for what?