Author: Sylvain Renard
Date: 02:40:55 06/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 11, 1999 at 02:11:49, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>Nobody could rank them based upon any real evidence. Many of the programs
>haven't competed since the last WMCCC. They spend a lot of time trying to rank
>the programs, based upon whatever evidence they have. I don't think I'd take
>issue with this part of it at least.
Hello,
in my previous message I sayed "ranking" but it was "rating" (in french
it is the same word!). The Sweedish rating list exists but it is non
official and there are several versions of the same program in it.
Creating an official ICCA rating list, with official events (computers
against computers but also men against machines tournaments) would
make things clear. It's true that some programs play very few, others
are knew, but I think it is better to calculate things than to try to read
them in a crystal ball... In France, every human player who begins playing
chess tournaments receive an official estimated rating until he is
rated (most of the time it is 1499 but you can ask for more or less if
you want). I don't think it is impossible with programs, the big difference
with the existing system is that things would be public and clear.
The existence of an increasing number of non official rating lists
proves that there is a lack somewhere. In my opinion, it is the job
of the ICCA to create an official rating list.
Best regards,
Sylvain Renard
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.