Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:33:29 10/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 24, 2001 at 11:43:18, Joshua Lee wrote: >For Starters If Deep Fritz were that Magical 2700+ number Like the SSDF Claims >Then Huebner wouldn't have Drawn Every Game of their 6 game Match No We cannot say it. The correct rating is not based on games against one player and 100 elo difference is not so big that 3-3 is impossible. >Secondly With All Do Respect No Commercial Program Has Played As Many Humans As >The Deep Thought/Blue Programs and Also The Number of Games Vs. Rating Average >Is Unequal (Not as many games as Deep Thought) If you Suggest that programs are >So Strong why Then Hasn't One of the Top Commercial's Put up so much Money as to >Play Against a Top 10 Opponent and Not a Couple of Unknowns? I guess that they need to pay more money for it. Programmers are not rich people and they cannot let themselves to pay a lot of money for a match. I suspect that >2700 performance against 2500 players is not more productive for a commercial program than the same performance against 2700 players. > >Tiger Didn't Beat All GM's and I don't think they were very Strong GM's someone >even mentioned that Tiger was Lost in One Position. That may not say Much but I >would Consider Rebel's Achievement or Deep Junior's Much More Impressive. I do not. I think that getting performance of 2700 against 2500 players is not easier than getting the same performance against 2700 players and tiger's performance was better than Deep Junior's performance. >Rebel because of So many Games against Strong and well Known GM's Like Rhode and >Scherbakov and Deep Junior for Beating GM Leko and Heubner , Drawing Everyone >else Besides Kramnik and Lautier. > >8 Games are not really enough and 1 Tournament By no means makes a Computer a GM >, They Can't Get The Title anyway, I would Like for this to be a possibility >Then maybe someone would Try for their program to get it and we could Look to >FIDE instead of SSDF . I hate that the list should be lowered by upto 200 >points even by their own estimate the link is on their page. > >Another thing Tiger's Rating On an 866 Compared to the Speed Difference of the >SSDF would Still Point to the SSDF's Given Rating for Tiger to be Wrong. > >Tiger is 2703 on a 1200 >While 2788 against an average 2497FIDE On a Slower 866 Hmm Somebody is wrong >Either all those players were lying about their rating or Could it be that the >SSDF Is Off ... If you use the same logic you are going to find that the rating of humans is wrong. There were tournaments of 9 games when I got performace of more than 100 elo better than my rating and tournaments when my performance was more than 100 elo worse than my rating. 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.