Author: Roger D Davis
Date: 19:39:55 06/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
Seems that the Buchholz valuation is really an index of how tough your opponents were, then it seems that to the extent that the index is not correlated with the ranking (the winner should have the highest, right?), the programs weren't seeded correctly, and that extra rounds should be run until the valuation and the rankings can be brought to a certain level of agreement. Yes? No? Insane? Roger On June 19, 1999 at 22:11:59, Tina Long wrote: >On June 19, 1999 at 15:37:20, Gustavo Pereira wrote: > >>On June 19, 1999 at 15:30:48, Roger D Davis wrote: >> >>>The subject line says it all. >> >>To calculate Buchholz just add up all the opponent's scores. If it is Median >>Buchholz you add up all the opponent's score except for the highest and lowest >>placed opponent. >Q: Why did Hiarcs have the highest Buchholz? >Mainly because Hiarcs had three points from three rounds & therefore played >opponents who had high scores already. > >Then a little luck (good or bad) comes in, as your initial seeding, & the need >for a fair proportion of White & black games affects each rounds opponents. And >the scores of your previous opponents adds (or doesn't) to your Buchholz. > >Tina Long
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.