Author: Mark Young
Date: 11:08:51 02/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 1999 at 12:05:46, KarinsDad wrote: >On February 27, 1999 at 17:58:19, Mark Young wrote: > >>On February 27, 1999 at 16:19:46, Leon Stancliff wrote: >> >>I find the data interesting, but the ratings data from ICC or any online chess >>server will be skewed. I do not know if you can draw any kind of conclusions >>from them. The are just to many sub pools of rating in ICC. >>1. You have GMs who will play anyone. >>2. You have GMs who only play humans >>3. You have GMs who only play humans or computers they can beat >>4. You have GMs who only play other GM’s or IM at the top of the ICC ratings >>list. >> >>Then you have a similar sub pools of ratings for computer accounts. This makes >>comparing chess strength by chess server ratings almost impossible, between GMs >>and computers, or even GMs to GMs or computers to computers. > >Mark, > >Why does this matter? In the USCF, you have GMs who will only play in Open >sections, GMs who will only play in Closed sections, and GMs who will play in >any section. Do you make the claim that their USCF rating should be different >based on what type of (equal time, but different types of opponent) tournament >that they used to get their rating? No. You give them their due regardless of >what type of opponents they used to acquire their rating. The same should apply >here. > >I have noticed that an A class player in an urban area is usually (not always, >but most of the time) stronger than an A class player in a rural area. This is >probably due to the fact that the urban player gets more opportunities to play a >more diverse group of players. However, the rural player is still class A since >he can beat the B class players in his area 75% of the time. Does the USCF >distinguish between the two. Of course not. Similar to this, the data derived >from the chess servers on GMs vs. computers is still valid enough to draw >conclusions from, regardless of the playing habits of the GMs and programs >involved. > >KarinsDad It matters because it skews the ratings. When you can pick whom you will play and not play, no matter how it is done, skews the ratings. I don’t mean a player deciding to play only in the closed section of a tournament. An example would be GM Kasparov deciding never to play GM Anand, because he knows this is the only player that can beat him, so even in the same tournament they don’t play, thereby keeping his rating higher and GM Anand rating lower. Mark > >> >>For Chess server ratings to have any meaning at all, they could not allow >>players to choose whom they will and will not play. This would be very >>unpopular. >> >>Mark Young >> >> >[snip]
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.