Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Human rating differential compared to Computer vs. computer

Author: KarinsDad

Date: 13:32:45 01/29/99

Go up one level in this thread


On January 29, 1999 at 16:05:41, Matt Frank wrote:

>Of course the comments I made are based on an exact elo diff of 500 pts. If we
>assume for a moment that you have never drawn against someone rated over 500
>points above you then we might also conclude that many of your opponents were
>rated even MORE THAN 500 points above you. Now, if we assume that when we
>calculated the rating difference of people rated over 500 points more than you
>when they played you, it may be that the following is approx true: In all the
>games that I have played with players rated over 500 points stronger than me the
>average difference between our ratingsa at the time of the game was 675 (pick a
>number) points greater; then: You would expect expect that in all of those games
>the score would be 49 to 1, against you. Do you see my point?
>
>Matt Frank

Ah, no. I do not understand your point. Are you saying that since Professor Elo
said that a 675 point difference should average to a 49 to 1 ratio, that this is
what should happen.

I do not think that practically, that is the case. I think that the formula
starts getting more and more off once you get past the 300 to 400 point range.

If has never happened in my experience, nor for anyone I've ever known. I've
never had a B class player friend say, "Hey, I beat a master". Ever. Not even a
"Hey, I drew a master." comment. This is not to say that it has never happens, I
just have never heard of it happening (except in blitz and in one case in my
local club where a C class player beat an expert giving a simul, but she is also
an up and coming player and it was a simul) and I know quite a few chess players
around the country.

The generally used formula is just a rough approximation. The USCF could
probably analyze it's database and come up with a better formula (however, even
this would be suspect due to rating deflations due to up and coming players and
rating inflations due to floors, aging effects, and health effects).

For computers, I wouldn't have a clue. Maybe some of the other people who test
them against each other would know something.

KarinsDad



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.