Author: Ingo Althofer
Date: 23:59:33 06/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 1999 at 22:44:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >note that their tiebreak was 1.0 points different. Note that shredder was >seeded very low (incorrectly) which paired it against a good opponent in >round 1, That is wrong. Shredder was seeded to low, but in round 1 it got Neurologic which made altogether 1.0 points in the whole tournament. So without round 1 Shredders lead in Buchholz would have been even higher. >while ferret was paired high (correctly) and was paired against a >weaker opponent in round 1. That could account for the 1.0 difference in >tie-break instantly... > >IE nothing says that shredder played better opponents... try the tiebreak >without round 1 scores and see what happens... and then decide whether the >sum-of-opponents is meaningful when they are that close. Both played well. >And a coin-toss would have been just as accurate to pick the better program >since they drew twice...
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.