Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Congratulation for chesstiger(better performance than shredder in wmccc)

Author: Miguel A. Ballicora

Date: 07:12:50 08/24/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 24, 2001 at 10:04:45, Mark Young wrote:

>On August 24, 2001 at 09:37:13, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>
>>On August 24, 2001 at 08:52:51, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:58:08, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:51:16, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:29:21, Günther Simon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:15:30, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:06:51, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Here are the results by
>>>>>>>>elostat program
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You can see that shredder is only 3th place micro based on the performance.
>>>>>>>>Shredder is the world Micro champion by definition but Tiger and Rebel had a
>>>>>>>>better performance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>1 Deep Junior 7                  : 2745  228 281     9    88.9 %   2384   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>2 Quest (DeepFritz)              : 2550  266 169     9    66.7 %   2430   44.4 %
>>>>>>>>3 Chess Tiger 14.6 Gambit Tiger  : 2499  291 229     9    55.6 %   2461   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>4 Crafty 18.10X                  : 2467  291 165     9    55.6 %   2428   44.4 %
>>>>>>>>5 Rebel                          : 2466  291 229     9    55.6 %   2428   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>6 Shredder                       : 2466  266 249     9    66.7 %   2346   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>7 Goliath                        : 2421  291 165     9    55.6 %   2382   44.4 %
>>>>>>>>8 Gromit 3.9.5                   : 2364  278 201     9    61.1 %   2285   33.3 %
>>>>>>>>9 Ferret                         : 2359  291 229     9    55.6 %   2320   22.2
>>>>>>>>%10 Gandalf 5.0                   : 2310  291 229     9    55.6 %   2271   22.2
>>>>>>>>%
>>>>>>>>11 ParSOS                        : 2256  291 229     9    55.6 %   2217   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>12 Diep                          : 2227  165 291     9    44.4 %   2265   44.4 %
>>>>>>>>13 IsiChess X                    : 2166  201 278     9    38.9 %   2245   33.3 %
>>>>>>>>14 Tao                           : 2165  229 291     9    44.4 %   2203   22.2 %
>>>>>>>>15 Ruy Lopez                     : 2118  366 266     9    33.3 %   2238    0.0 %
>>>>>>>>16 Pharaon                       : 2082  169 266     9    33.3 %   2202   44.4 %
>>>>>>>>17 SpiderGirl                    : 2014  213 255     9    27.8 %   2180   33.3 %
>>>>>>>>18 XiNiX                         : 1724  400 108     9     5.6 %   2216
>>
>>
>>LOOK AT THE ERROR MARGINS ! ELOstat is in perfect agreement with everything.
>>
>>
>>
>> 11.1 %
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>congratulation also for the Deep Junior team for winning the event convincingly
>>>>>>>>when the difference from the second place is almost 200 elo and the hardware
>>>>>>>>explain less than 70 elo difference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I can add that I think that it may be a better idea to use elostat to decide
>>>>>>>about the world champion in the future.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I know that a lot of people are going to disagree but it is my opinion.
>>>>>>>I prefer a complicated method that does more justive and not a simple method.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sorry Uri - but this is really nonsens.
>>>>>>You cant use ELO-Stat on a Swiss Tournament with 9 rounds as
>>>>>>it is described by the author. ELO-Stat is designed to calculate
>>>>>>ratings out of a pool of unknown rated progs with a very very lot
>>>>>>of games.
>>>>>>Therefor if you take a closer look at your table you would see that
>>>>>>the error margin is at least 435!pts (Pharaon) and max 632!! (RuyLopez).
>>>>>>And would you really believe Parallel SOS to be at 2256? :))
>>>>>
>>>>>The question is not which program is better.
>>>>>competitions of 9 rounds are not supposed to answer this question.
>>>>>
>>>>>The question is which program did better result.
>>>>>The elostat answer this question better than the ranking
>>>>>
>>>>>The rating is also based on average of 2300 if I remember corectly and should
>>>>>not be compared with humans.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>You must be a strong Tigerfan to post this very unlike post, as it
>>>>>>is diametral to all your previous posts about stats?!
>>>>>
>>>>>I do not see contradiction with previous posts of myself.
>>>>>
>>>>>>(Btw hasnt Shredder won against Tiger or am I out of memory?)
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes
>>>>>Shredder won against tiger.
>>>>>
>>>>>Uri
>>>>
>>>>I can add congratulations for crafty for being the best amatuer.
>>>>I here that Gromit won the title of the best amatuer and it is unfair because
>>>>Crafty was more than 100 elo better
>>>>
>>>>I know that Gromit beated Crafty in the last round but it does not change the
>>>>fact that Crafty was more than 100 elo better based on elostat.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>A nine round Swiss tournament to determine the computer world championship in my
>>>mind makes the title world champion a joke.  This is nothing more then another
>>>computer chess tournament. To draw any conclusions from this one tournament and
>>>then declare the winner to be the world champion makes me sick. If the title of
>>>computer world champion means the winner is declared the strongest computer
>>>program.
>>
>>It's just the same with human tournaments. The world champion is determined as
>>the winner of a special tournament.
>
>Not Correct, yes they play tournaments, but never using the Swiss tournament
>system.
>
>>
>>That's an exciting and interesting way to determine the champion and I seriously
>>can't see what's wrong with this.
>
>You don't see a problem with an open tournament with only 9 rounds to declar a
>world champion? No Human Champion has ever been declared this way.

Yes, every single year the Junior World Champion is declared after
a swiss tournament. In fact, preliminary qualifiers for the FIDE title
are also swiss tournaments. The Panamerican just finished with 140+ strong
players (Yermolinsky won).

Regards,
Miguel



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.