Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Dieps 700 elo-book in action:

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 15:12:48 02/27/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 27, 2005 at 17:54:40, Uri Blass wrote:

>On February 27, 2005 at 17:33:02, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>
>>On February 27, 2005 at 14:06:58, Peter Skinner wrote:
>>
>>>On February 27, 2005 at 07:17:44, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well, Vincent said that if an engine play Elo 3000 than the book is giving in
>>>>these tournaments 700 points and the program is 2300 Elo strong.
>>>>
>>>>I do not think Diep is playing Elo 3000 so the Vincent's rule cannot be used.
>>>>
>>>>Sandro
>>>
>>>Diep wasn't even playing at a 2400 level at the IPCCC.
>>>
>>>With all the games (well all games that were actually posted) from the event and
>>>using a start value of 2400, Diep scored:
>>>
>>>Program                          Elo    +   -   Games   Score   Av.Op.  Draws
>>>
>>>  1 Hydra                          : 2810  239 220     9    88.9 %   2449   22.2
>>>%
>>>  2 Shredder                       : 2715  320 296     9    83.3 %   2436   11.1
>>>%
>>>  3 Gandalf                        : 2566  214 205     9    61.1 %   2488   33.3
>>>%
>>>  4 Spike                          : 2499  267 247     9    61.1 %   2420   11.1
>>>%
>>>  5 Nexus                          : 2455  292 292     7    50.0 %   2455   14.3
>>>%
>>>  6 Ikarus                         : 2447  220 220     7    50.0 %   2447   42.9
>>>%
>>>  7 Anaconda                       : 2436  207 207     9    50.0 %   2436   33.3
>>>%
>>>  8 Jonny                          : 2428  207 207     9    50.0 %   2428   33.3
>>>%
>>>  9 SOS                            : 2418  207 207     9    50.0 %   2418   33.3
>>>%
>>> 10 The Baron                      : 2417  187 183     9    55.6 %   2378   44.4
>>>%
>>> 11 Diep                           : 2397  187 183     9    55.6 %   2358   44.4
>>>%
>>> 12 Neurologic                     : 2218  177 194     8    37.5 %   2307   50.0
>>>%
>>> 13 Patzer                         : 2208  177 195     9    33.3 %   2329   44.4
>>>%
>>> 14 Quark                          : 2169  205 229     9    27.8 %   2335   33.3
>>>%
>>> 15 IsiChess                       : 2150  248 286     8    25.0 %   2341   25.0
>>>%
>>> 16 Matador                        : 2041  173 291     9    16.7 %   2321   33.3
>>>%
>>
>>Rg. 	Titel 	Name 	     Pkte 	Wtg.
>>1 	  	Hydra 	        8 	44½
>>2 	  	Shredder 	7½ 	43
>>3 	  	Gandalf 	5½ 	47
>>4 	  	Spike 	        5½ 	42½
>>5 	  	Ikarus 	        5 	42
>>6 	  	The Baron 	5 	39
>>7 	  	Diep 	        5 	37
>>8 	  	Anaconda 	4½ 	44
>>9 	  	SOS 	        4½ 	43
>>10 	  	Nexus 	        4½ 	43
>>11 	  	Johnny 	        4½ 	43
>>12 	  	Patzer 	        3 	35½
>>13 	  	Neurologic 	3 	34
>>14 	  	Isichess 	2½ 	38½
>>15 	  	Quark 	        2½ 	36
>>16 	  	Matador 	1½ 	36
>>
>>http://wwwcs.upb.de/~IPCCC/IPCCC2005/r3.HTM
>>According to the Official Standing Table of teh Tournament, Diep was seventh and
>>not eleventh as you put in your table.
>
>The table is not officical standing table but performance table based on the
>event and the assumption that the average rating is 2400 so I do not see the
>problem with it.
>
>Diep played relatively weaker opponents(for example did not play hydra) so the 5
>that it scored may be considered as worse than 4.5 that scored other programs.
>
>>
>>About your point, Diep was:
>>
>>1) 6th. in Paderborn 2004: http://wwwcs.upb.de/~IPCCC/IPCCC2004/ranking.html
>>2) 4th. in 4th International CSVN Tournament:
>>http://www.computerschaak.nl/ict4tour.html
>>3) 3rd. in 12th World Computer Chess Championship 2004:
>>http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/games/results.html
>>4) 1st. in Dutch Open 2004: http://www.computerschaak.nl/docc04.html.
>>
>>They are all the Official Tables and they don´t say that Diep was under 2400
>>Elo.
>
>I agree that there is no proof for rating under 2400
>
>Peter made the assumption that the average rating of the field is 2400 and the
>only thing that I can say is that we do not know the average rating of the
>field.
>
>> I do not see that your table is proving anything.
>

The typical Uri Blass.... If Peter made an assumption without the complete games
and he put a 2400 elo as an initial value. It doesnt prove what a relative elo
is.

Correction for the person who doesnt read: That is not my table. It is the
official table of Paderborn, Mr. Blass. The Skinner´s Table puts Diep in the
_11th_ place when it got the 7th. place.

You simply dont see because you dont read.

>It certainly can prove nothing about rating.
>It may only suggest that diep in 2005 did not perform better than the average of
>the field(if the average of the field is 2400 then Diep's performance is 2397).
>

The suggestion doesnt say anything about the range of 700elo points.

>
>
>>
>>By the way, the current responsable of the Book is Erdogan. I have just pointed
>>out the Diep performance for the year 2004. Less than 2400 Elo?!! :))) How could
>>your table prove that?
>
>I do not see where peter mentioned the year 2004.

Knowing that Diepeveen and Skinner are not in harmony, the message might say
other thing. I pointed out several links that proves the Diep´s overall is not
under 2400 as it was said. I pointed out official results, not a personal table.


>He meant 2005.

Because, you are alwaays in the area of suppositions and I dont know what the
real sense of the table was, I just put the Diep performane in the current
Tournament as well as over the year 2004.

AO.

PD: Only the moon can know what you tried to refute here.


>
>Uri



This page took 0.01 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.