Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Maximum ELO

Author: Torstein Hall

Date: 06:44:02 06/09/99

Go up one level in this thread


On June 08, 1999 at 21:16:41, KarinsDad wrote:

<BIG SNIP>
>My guess is that he would loss them all since even he plays nowhere near perfect
>chess. Looking only 6 to 10 ply down (on average) means that he HAS to be making
>mistakes every game. They are just real subtle mistakes. And this can be
>illustrated by looking at Garry's endgames. Normally, he has an advantage
>walking into the endgame. But analyze his endgames where he does not have an
>advantage against a tablebase and you will see that he does not play perfect
>chess (or anywhere near).
>
>Garry playing against a perfect full game tablebase would be like me playing
>against Deep Blue. Not a contest. Ever.
>
>Just my guess...  :-)
>
>KarinsDad :)

...and even I with a little help from Hiarcs can find obvious errors in
Kasparovs play.

A nice example would be his game against Short in Sarajevo? where he had a lost
position if Short just had played Rd8 instead of Rc8 ( I think this was at move
32, if anyone is interested I can check it out at home! )

..anyway Is not ELO supposed to be a system with no inflation, so if one person
or program started to win a lot the others would fall in rating and making it
harder and harder to earn ELO points?

Torstein





>>A 10% win expectance correlates to approximately a 400 point ELO rating
>>difference, and since Kasparov is ~2850 FIDE (after his recent victories) this
>>would mean the "perfect" chess player would have a rating of at least 3250.
>>
>>Just my guess...  :-)
>>
>>--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.