Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:58:36 01/15/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2003 at 12:33:05, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >On January 15, 2003 at 11:51:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 15, 2003 at 11:09:32, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >> >>>On January 14, 2003 at 20:47:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On January 14, 2003 at 19:47:21, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>[snip] >>> >>>>>I do not suggest exactly how to do it and it seems that the problem does not >>>>>interest the ICC. >>>> >>>> >>>>ICC is not interested. FIDE is not interested. USCF is not interested. In >>>>fact, _no_ chess federation I know of does the initial rating differently than >>>>what is done today. >>> >>> >>>I told you already, FIDE does not do it in the same way. >> >>Have they changed this recently? My last official rules from FIDE used >>the _same_ "provisional rating" formula that everyone else uses. The >>classic win+400 + draw + lose-400 / N formula that ICC uses. >> >>So I guess I don't understand what you mean, assuming they _have_ changed >>the way that they calculate _initial_ ratings. > >They did change (just checked) to make it more simple for players to check the >rating by themselves. Check point 14.4, when they mention that doing a >calculation differently will more accurate (game by game). > >http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0214 > >In another place, the danger of avegaring becomes obvious when it is suggested >what kind of player should not be invited to a tournament. > >see point 10.68 > >"...F was a poor choice of player for the tournament. He dragged down the >average rating too much. If a player rated 2380 or higher had replaced him, C >would achieve a better rating even with one point less..." > >http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=B0210 > >[snip] > >>>>Can you spell "Elo"??? >>> >>>This is rather insulting. You are dealing with Uri and me like we are two >>>schoolboys and you are not more qualified than any of us in this matter. I do >>>not mind it if it comes with some content, but you are not even reading the >>>messages. Uri pointed out a problem and you come with the >>>"'I don't like that, fix it' is _not_ going to produce changes." >>>What? it is not possible to post anymore something about something that you do >>>not like? Before you find a solution, you have to identify a problem and discuss >>>about it. Not to mention, suggestions were provided. >>> >>>Miguel >> >>It wasn't intended to be insulting. It was intended to point out that >>what you are talking about is _exactly_ what the Elo system was designed to >>do. >> >>Neither of you have produced any _reasonable_ approach to initially compute >>a players rating. That seems to be all that is in debate here, as once the >>provisional period is up, the Elo system seems to be accepted by all, even >>with the minor "flaw" in the assumption of what K should be. But for the >>provisional period I have seen _no_ suggestion that makes any sense yet. I > >You have not seen or you have not looked for? FIDE did it different as many >other federations did in the past (I am sure about the Argentinian for >instance). > >>have asked you in another post to simply make a precise formulation of an >>algorithm that you think is better. I can then show you why it is not better > >I did a formulation that apparently you did not understand. In another post, >Richard explained it again. Maybe that is clearer. > >Miguel Here is the way to prove your way is better or worse. Take _any_ tournament. Pick a player and assume his rating is unknown and compute it as though it were provisional, based on the results in that tournament. Compare the result to his _real_ rating at the end of the event, since that is a known value. Do this both ways. Using the simple average, as well as any approach you want to propose as better. See which one produces the more accurate result for a bunch of unique cases. The one with the lowest sum-of-error-squared is the best approach. I'll be surprised if the current TPR approach can be beaten if you pick a single player and compute his rating using both. Repeat for each player in the event. For multiple events...
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.