Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:39:34 02/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2005 at 01:40:16, Sandro Necchi wrote: >On February 18, 2005 at 19:19:31, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On February 18, 2005 at 18:52:58, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2005 at 18:12:18, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> >>>>On February 18, 2005 at 13:29:56, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>> >>>>>>Yes but what is "help a lot"? >>>>> >>>>>Look the answer: 30% of the total score reached by Diep in testings and 25% of >>>>>the total score reached by Zappa in private tests. The books was responsible of >>>>>30% and 25% of the score reached for every mentioned engine. >>>> >>>>I'm not quite sure what that means actually. >>>> >>>>If your score is 20% and you improve that by 30% you score will be 26% which is >>>>a rating increase of 59 Elo. >>>> >>>>If the score improves 30% from 50% to 65% it's a 107 Elo. >>>> >>>>If the score improves by 30% from 35% to 65% it's 240 Elo. >>>> >>>>If the score improves by 30% from 60% to 90% it's 320 Elo. >>>> >>>>-S. >>> >>>These assumptions are absolutely wrong. It is a common problem in this Forum of >>>asserting things that I have not said. >>> >>>"Look the answer: 30% of the total score reached by Diep in testings and 25% of >>>the total score reached by Zappa in private tests. The books was responsible of >>>30% and 25% of the score reached for every mentioned engine. >>>I'm not quite sure what that means actually." >>> >>>Example: If Diep played 10 games, and it won 10 games, 3 games were because of >>>the book. Do you understand? A direct win because of the book. >>> >>>AO-- >> >>It means that diep scored 10/x in your testing with book when 7/x was without >>book when x is unknown. > >No, not necessarely. > >We weed to define what one means to the book first. >It could be thanks to the book even if the program does not come out of the >opening with a winning advantage: i.e. a small plus but the program play very >well out of that position. >If the program got a position that handles very well with book x, than book x >did very well and has part of the win merit. I agree I did not say "3 direct wins out of book" I know that: 1)it can be earning draw instead of loss in some cases 2)I did not translate direct wins out of book to winning position and I assumed that the poster include also cases that the position out of book was not winning but the program knew to play it better than the opponents and getting that type of position was planned so the wins were result of book. 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.