Talk:Michael Adams (chess player)

Importance not enough underlined
I find that the importance of this chessplayer is not clearly underlined in the article, especially in the Lead. He only reached the semi-finals of the various World Chess Championships, and it was only in the substandard FIDE cycles. It would be better to point out his peak position in the ratings, as I guess he was in the top-5 at some point. SyG (talk) 10:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I disagree. I think World championship results are where it is at, not ratings (I realise not everyone thinks that, however). Adams has had some good results in both the PCA and FIDE championships, and did in fact make the FIDE final once, in 2004. So he's a very strong player with some good WC results without ever really threatening to win the "real" world championship, and I think the article reflects that. Peter Ballard (talk) 10:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, world championship finalist is important enough, surely. Also world top 20. Winner at Merida last week with a 2800+ performance ... his achievements are right up there. Brittle heaven (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, maybe my issue was not clear. I fell that the achievements of Adams in ranking (he was n°4 at some point) are more impressive than his achievements in World Championship. If nobody objects I will add this ranking performance in the article. Also, based on the article I understand he never was World Championship Finalist, he only reached the final of the Candidates match (against Anand), and that makes him World Championship Semi-Finalist. Correct me if I am wrong, because if I am confused on this point probably some other readers could be. SyG (talk) 11:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree the article does not flow or explain the detail very well; it's a classic case of an article written in disjointed chunks by different authors. However, I have no reason to doubt its content, so it appears Adams was semi-finalist in 1997, 1999 and 2000. Later, the losing finalist in 2004, which would be his best achievement so far in my opinion, although I wouldn't doubt that world top 5 by ranking is also highly notable. I'll adjust the entry in the lead, as you suggest, and if anyone else has a better grasp of the details, please feel free to make further revisions. Brittle heaven (talk) 12:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, my mistake. Now you have rephrased the Lead, I understand he was a finalist indeed, in 2004, even if it was only in the FIDE championship. Sorry for the confusion. SyG (talk) 16:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Chess960
Was finalist of Chess960(Fischer Chess). Something to consider adding to the article. SunCreator (talk) 14:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

England's number one
The article doesn't mention when he first became England's number one player. I'm guessing it was sometime in the mid 90s. I mention it because in the September 2009 rating list he has just lost the top spot to Nigel Short. How long has it been since he wasn't no 1? (And why have his results declined so much lately?) --Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:David Pritchard (chess player) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:47, 17 November 2019 (UTC)