Author: KarinsDad
Date: 09:01:20 01/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 29, 1999 at 11:51:30, Terry Presgrove wrote: > I have read that in standard play a human rated 500 points higher > than a human opponent would never lose to that opponent. While I'm > not sure that is always the case (always exceptions) in general its > probably pretty accurate. My question is how does this 500 pts. differential > with humans correlate to computer vs. computer? Obviously blitz is > quite a different game so I'm speaking particularly of standard play > slower time controls. In computer vs. computer at what differential > would the lower rated computer be in the position of trying to sink > a battle ship with a BB gun? > > TP I think that there is a certain amount of accuracy to this statement. I know that although I have played some good games and even better moves (I once sacked a knight against a player 500 points higher than me and we did not find the refutation until analysis later, he still won the game though) against people rated 400+ points higher than myself, I have never beaten anyone rated more than 300 points above me. There are of course exceptions, but those are probably ones of lower rated players who haven't played rated games in a while and have gotten better or higher rated players who are tired or sick. These cases are probably rare, but it would be interesting to hear of people's "the highest differential where I was lower and won" type stories. I'm sure that statistically, a 500 point differential between computers results in more games being drawn and won by the lower rated computer than when comparing humans with humans. The reason is that lower rated humans can be swindled, even when winning, whereas computers cannot (unless it falls outside of the computers event horizon). KarinsDad
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.