Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 00:41:05 02/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2005 at 18:52:58, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >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. I'm just explaining that you can't translate that to an Elo number without knowing how many games there were in total. If you play a total of 10 games and score 7 without book and 10 with book, your score has improved from 70% to 100%(!!) which is a huge improvement (800 Elo). If you improved from 7% to 10% its a much smaller improvement (70 Elo). >AO-- > > >I have not pointed out anything about any elo relation. Well that is the big question :) -S.
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.