• porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    You underestimate how much better experts are to everyone else. For chess, for example, the Elo rating for a beginner who knows the rules is about 500, a weak club player around 1200, a good club player around 1700, a master around 2200, and the world champion around 2800.

    For each of these jumps the difference is about 70 times better, as in the person with the weaker rating is expected to win one out of 70 times.

    So the world champion is not just 70 times better than a beginner, they are a few million times better.

    I’m not saying tennis works exactly the same way as chess, but people really underestimate just how much better some people are at some things. At that difference, the beginner and the champ could play games 24/7 for centuries and the beginner would never win one game.

    The idea that 67x better means a 67x linear increase in speed is nonsense. Usain Bolt does not need to be 67x faster than you, it’s enough to be somewhat faster in all 67 out of 67 races, which he would be.

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 minutes ago

      Usain Bolt would also win 67 out of 67 races against the second best sprinter in the world. The mode is completely different. In the same wake for chess. Whether you win a game or not is a culmination of dozens of turns. So for chess it is more closer to a match of tennis, rather than scoring a point. And i am pretty sure that i could play a game of chess against Magnus Carlsen himself and beat at least one stone, while loosing catastrophically otherwise.