What contradicts what?
>Even putting that asside, I don't think that is a reasonable
>possition to take. It seems ridiculous to me to say that Olympic
>medalist gymnasts do not have even one mastery in their athletic
>abilities.
Ridiculous it is, and fortunately for me i'm not saying that. Olympic medalists are obviously far above the human norm; definitely superhuman.
>Are you saying that if Rick Meints ran at a springboard
>and tried to do a looping half-twist flip that if he rolled under his
>(for the sake of argument) low Agility ability, that if he somehow
>succeeded or roled a '1', that he would be exactly as successful as
>one of the best Russian tennage vaulting champions?
Big Success is the best there is. So, rules-wise, yes (assuming it's an ability test). OTOH, in a contest situation between Rick and a Russian teenage vaulting champion, Rick would in all likelihood be soundly trounced.
>To me, clearly these people have multiple masteries in their
>respective abilities.
Exactly.
>I with my Chess playing ability of about 5
>have no chance whatsoever of beating Karpov in a streight game.
>He has at least 2 materies on me, probably three. Surely he has more
>than a 19, or even a 20 in Play Chess?
When i say 'human norm' i mean the ability ratings of a normal human. Karpov is definitely not the human norm when it comes to chessplaying, is he?
-- - Mikael Raaterova [.sig omitted on legal advice]
Powered by hypermail