Who was comparing him to any Fields medal winner? You said his papers were of "very limited quality." That's what I'm saying is untrue. That isn't to say the

Who was comparing him to any Fields medal winner? You said his papers were of "very limited quality." That's what I'm saying is untrue. That isn't to say there aren't some stinkers in the mix. Anyone who publishes 1500+ papers is going to have some stinkers. But, "very limited quality" as a general assessment is way, way off the mark, IMO. Yes, Erdos and Euler are not really comparable, but that's mostly the effect of 250 years and a lot of drugs, IMO. :P