Author: Peter Skinner
Date: 22:06:37 02/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2005 at 00:00:23, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >Yes. It is _useless_ and manipulated. You dont have all the result neither all >the games. Example: Patzer - Johnny, last round. Fine I will get the remaining games, do the test again, and guess what... Diep's performance rating in the tournament will _still_ be low. Diep can finish ahead of someone and _still_ have a lower TPR. It is based on it's opponents rating and how it finished. You don't seem to be able to grasp that. >If you have generated a Elo based on an incomplete pgn file, you have >manipulated the data. I resturn you the strik 2+2 = 4. What are you going to argue when I have the full pgn file? That saturn was alligned with mars when I generated the elo? > >>Diep's TPR (Tournament Performance Rating) for the event was 11th overall. It >>officially placed 7th. >> >>What is so hard to understand about this? >> > >No, if people were idiot, people would accept your manipulated table. It is not manipulated. Manipluated would be if I changed results to make it look worse. I have done no such thing. I don't need to do anything to make Diep look bad. It took care of that all by itself at the tournament. >PD: Apart of the fact that your table is a...., your accusations about being >Vincent Diepeveen show the real person that you are. Show the real person I am? A reasonable one? Next time you pick an arguement with someone you better watch what is coming to you. Not only will I prove the results, I am going to make you look like a complete and utter fool over this. I will show how I arrived at the average starting elo, the pgn in full so you can run all the same tests, and once and for all prove that Diep's _performance_ rating in the tournament was bad. All you have done is piss me off with your useless babble... Peter
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.