OOAK Table Tennis Forum
http://ooakforum.com/

Rating estimation thread
http://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=30978
Page 3 of 3

Author:  iskandar taib [ 17 Feb 2017, 19:27 ]
Post subject:  Re: Rating estimation thread

What I meant was, in that video he LOOKED like he might be what people say his level is. He didn't in the earlier video. And if he really were 2600, then he'd be good enough to play on par against Danny Seemiller when he was in his prime (last I checked Danny's still 2550 or so..). 2500 is easier to believe.

Iskandar

Author:  Japsican [ 17 Feb 2017, 23:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: Rating estimation thread

iskandar taib wrote:
What I meant was, in that video he LOOKED like he might be what people say his level is. He didn't in the earlier video. And if he really were 2600, then he'd be good enough to play on par against Danny Seemiller when he was in his prime (last I checked Danny's still 2550 or so..). 2500 is easier to believe.

Iskandar


Gotcha.

I dunno, if I watch some of our 2600 level players...I don't see technical leaps and bounds compared to him (which is the point of these kinds of threads) but my eye is probably not keen enough. Just look at Sharon Alguetti, (plenty of vids) does he leap out at you much higher level? 2500, 2550, 2600...I mean, we're kind of splitting hairs here. Using the example of Sharon Alguetti again, just looking at his rating record for 2016, it swung up and down from 2536 to 2647 the next tournament, then back down to 2543 and now he's 2651.

RE: Danny Seemiller...ratings back then are not the same as they are now. Ratings have become inflated, and a 2600 level guy in the 70s is likely much higher using today's metrics.

Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/