Mike,
I love chess, but I'll never break through to a high level. I'm good enough to have fun, but am unwilling to put in the hard work to get competitive.
That said, I've always admired the grandmasters, and the world champions. Achieving a 2600 rating would be a true accomplishment. Hitting 2800, wow, just wow.
Since I'll never do that in chess, I got to wondering...I wonder how good I am at pool compared to how chess players play chess. I've put in a lot of hard work in my pool game, and while I'm not touring pro strength, I hit them pretty sporty some days. I am curious if I was as good at chess as I was at pool if I would've achieved the 'grandmaster' rating.
So there you have it. Is it possible to look at bell curve distributions or some other type of comparison to equate a fargo rating into an estimated chess rating to compare relative skills across separate arenas?
I love chess, but I'll never break through to a high level. I'm good enough to have fun, but am unwilling to put in the hard work to get competitive.
That said, I've always admired the grandmasters, and the world champions. Achieving a 2600 rating would be a true accomplishment. Hitting 2800, wow, just wow.
Since I'll never do that in chess, I got to wondering...I wonder how good I am at pool compared to how chess players play chess. I've put in a lot of hard work in my pool game, and while I'm not touring pro strength, I hit them pretty sporty some days. I am curious if I was as good at chess as I was at pool if I would've achieved the 'grandmaster' rating.
So there you have it. Is it possible to look at bell curve distributions or some other type of comparison to equate a fargo rating into an estimated chess rating to compare relative skills across separate arenas?