Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 19:38:02 08/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2001 at 10:56:16, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 24, 2001 at 10:50:25, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >>On August 24, 2001 at 07:06:51, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>Hi Uri, >> >>IMO these statistics make no sense. I rather would like to see >>Tiger being the first single program than having a better Elo >>performance. >> >>Jeroen > >I understand but I think that it is still better to have a better prformance >than having nothing. Your rating calculation sucks everywhere Uri, please put diep at 3500 rating and redo your calculation and you'll see that Shredder has a higher TPR than tiger, simply because i played shredder and tiger didn't. your TPR is simply too much dependant upon the rating you give other engines, that's the whole problem! Also take into account that there is a limited number of participants. You don't pick opponents yourself. You GET them. If you draw the first round you sure don't get an easier schedule than when you draw the last round, but you sure get a smaller TPR according to your calculations. I don't see why diep would be weaker than crafty or easier than crafty to play against in a tournament, but crafty definitely scored more points than diep and crafty definitely is scaled higher, despite that last 4 tournaments diep scored 3.5 out of 4 against crafty. The whole rating issue sucks on the right and left. the only way is to calculate it like in a round-robin tournament and you know that too! However that wouldn't serve your plans as in a round-robin tournament the average rating is defined as being the average over *all* participants, including your own rating (or whatever). Meaning that someone with a higher score is simply someone with a higher TPR. 6 out of 9 is better than 5 out of 9, like 4 out of 9 sucks completely compared to 5 out of 9. till 4.5 out of 9 points are pretty easy to get IMHO, but above that every half point is hard to get. Take further into account that the Necchi book completely sucked everywhere, and you'll end up that shredder definitely performed better than tiger. Any program with a book like tiger and a 5 out of 9 score should be ashamed! >Tiger does not have a public title but justice tells me to give it my title(I >will give my title to Shredder if Shredder is going to be in a similiar >situation when it has better performance without getting a public title) > >Uri >> >> >> >> >>>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 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
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.