Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:22:06 02/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2005 at 02:47:39, Arturo Ochoa 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. > >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. :)))) It is not logical that diep with your book won every game in your test so I assumed that you ignored games that it lost. If it really won every game in your tests then something is not serious in your test because in tournament it does not win every game. > >> >>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. I guess now that you probably meant that if Diep score x/10 in with book then it could score x-3/10 without your book and x=10 was only an example. 10/10 was unrealistic in the first place so it cause the confusion. I think that difference of 3/10 against the same opponents mean an estimate of 240 rating points. I got this estimate by the following assumption. Assume you have equal opponents you score 5/10 against them Your book increase the score to 8/10 8-2 against equal opponents is translated to estimate of 240 elo(If I beat 8-2 an opponent that is 240 elo weaker in Israel than the difference in rating between me and my opponent is still 240) > > >> >>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 ??????? My point was that testing at home against passive opponents cannot tell you a good estimate to the number of points that you can earn. You need to test against some unknown opponents to get a better estimate. In second thought I do not know how you test so it is possible that you used also testing against unknown opponents(to you) in order to get an estimate. > >> >>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? I think that my english was not good here. I meant drawing or losing a game against version X+1 when based on your preperation you could win it against version X. 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.