What's the point of reaching 2800 in bullet...

Ilikemilk, when I watch him play, being pretty much the top player (but let's say 1-3), he obviously is gonna always play less ranked.

2. When you have that high rank in chess, there are gonna be very few people who are in that top 3 across the fecking planet logging in at the same time, just so they play always together.

This is the worst witchhunt of a grand player ever and is absolutely ridiculous. I always look forward to when he is on but I wonder if misogynists in the ocmmunity try to drive him away form what.. envy? Moaning?
I have watched him play said lower ranking say 2300, and perhaps loses on in 10 or so, usually he loses then something like -20 and wins about +1-2 pr match.

Get over it, instead of showing respect, there is this tarded behaviour.

Fix glicko if you feel it sucks. The player doesn't.
People standing out like that might seem as a compliment but it's just too personal.

Again, sort out glicko then if it's so sucky. Or enforce something like for all players > 2600, must play +-100 within so and so many matches to keep playing or whatever it is which makes people get over it already.

Love the guy, he's got finer shoes than Cindarella.

Misogynists? How are people misogynist?

Seems like it.. since you manually remove him from lists and whatnot, despite playing accordingly to the lichess site and to glicko methods.

Anyway, looking at his opponents, you get e.g. Keith McKinnon beating him solidly, except for one game where they both had ~2600. In fact, justr as I said, when he had lower rating 2400-2600, he in game searches played many with higher rating, and consistently won.

If one feels that a player has too much rating due to selecting opponents (which we all do anyway, choosing our opponents :))

then why don't we/you make for the top 10 specifially of any class, a required top 10 tournament , where they gain a lichess top rank (say +100 for win, 90, for 2nd, 80 for 3rd.... 10th 0), so that if someone is always winning, they will either runaway on the ratings to show they are indeed within themselves, playing each other consistently the better one.

Else, if it is more even, then those points are distributed more evenly and again, it will have a fair distribution of the ratings. More than that, as I say, is just whining about A to Z reductio ad hominem. Just stop targetting people for no good reason.

How is that woman-hating? He's removed from the lists because he's either inactive for 2 weeks, or for one reason or another plays opponents so much lower than him that his Glicko rating can no longer be certain.

You should not lightly throw around the word misogynist.

Not sure why "Misogynists" is being used here! At this stage in lichess' growth i have always noticed that there is at least several 2300/2400's online at one time (which Singer refuses to play), instead challenging 2100's & below! If he wanted a real test of his strength he should play in bullet and hyperbullet tourneys.

However he has never entered or played a single one, leading many to the conclusion that he is only playing for a rating (aka stat whore) and so will hardly ever/never play anyone who will represent a real challenge to him. (for example: chessbrah, Hiimgosu, Erindreki, Feeglood, Fins,WhyBeMad, etc)

Sorry, I meant misanthrope.. not misogynist..my mistake :)