Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCT7 Seeding - How it was done....

Author: Anthony Cozzie

Date: 08:23:07 02/11/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 11, 2005 at 03:14:15, Peter Skinner wrote:

>Hello everyone,
>
>Since posting the seedings here and on ICC, I have been getting so many emails
>asking how it was done, or how a participant feels he/she should be rated above
>this or that program. So here is the explanation.
>
>There were eight people panelled for the seedings. I sent out the list of the
>participants and asked them to seed 1 through 44. 5 of the 8 gave me an actual
>list numbering from 1-44, and the others offered that the list that I had setup
>previously was fine with a few adjustments. My list consisted of ratings from
>the WBEC-Ridderk website.
>
>I then took the scores submitted and put them into a spreadsheet I made where if
>a program received a vote for the #1 seed it was given 44 points. If a program
>was given a vote for the #44 seed it was given 1 point and so forth.
>
>This worked out extremely well as there we no ties for a particular seeding
>spot, and the top 5 seeds were decided by a total of 3.25 points. That is how
>close it was.
>
>Seeing how I am not going to release who gave what program a certain score, yet
>many want to know who was involved to ensure accuracy, the panel of people that
>helped with the seeding process were:
>
>Robert Hyatt
>Mike Byrne
>Dann Corbit
>John Merlino
>Enrico Carrisco
>Tony Hedlund
>Gian-Carlo Pascutto
>Jim Walker
>
>I felt this was an excellent group of individuals to help with this task as they
>are all very knowledgable with almost all programs involved and they are also
>very well known members of this board.
>
>While some are not happy with their seeding I can tell you that most of the
>middle seeds were decided by 0.25 of a point or less in the breakdown. That is
>extremely accurate, and assures me that those involved did their homework.
>
>I want to thank them publically for all that they did, as I am sure it was time
>consuming seeing it was discussed via email thoroughly.
>
>Some of you may recognize this "formula" I used, as it is the same one used in
>the Cy Young balloting in baseball :)
>
>Peter

Well I personally have no complaints with #2 :)

anthony



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.