Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 23:47:39 02/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
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. Incorrect. I means, that Diep wont 7 games because of the game of the engine and 3 games because of the book. Learn to read. :)))) > >Of course even if we know x it cannot mean nothing about rating points because >the condition of your testing have to be different than the condition in the >tournament. This is not relevant to the point. The point is how points the book gave and how it can mean in elo points. Useless to explain you and you understand anything. > >In tournaments part of the opponents are not passive target and it is possible >that your plan against version X does not work for the simple reason that the >author upgraded to version X+1. This is not relevant. In Tournament, a direct win has always happened. What is your point ??????? > >Not easy to predict how many prepared direct wins you will lose because of that. I have never lost a direct wint. What kind of absurd idea are you meaning? > >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.