Author: Shep
Date: 06:25:22 07/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 1999 at 08:20:19, Harald Faber wrote:
>On July 13, 1999 at 07:21:54, Shep wrote:
>You astonish me on and on.
>AFTER the tourney you decide to continue the interrupted game or not, based on
>the ranking and effects a different result woud have???
Yes. It is another "optimization". If no significance for the overall standings
can be expected from a (hypothetically) different result in an adjudicated game,
I see no point wasting another day finishing the game.
Just like I never watch the 3rd place playoff in soccer WCs. :)
>>Maybe it is outdated; I will ponder your arguments for future tournaments.
>>Even more so since my next tournament will be all-amateur, where showing "+3" is
>>not a guarantee for being able to win... :)
>
>Not only for amateurs.
>Best example at this moment is Bobs game he posted Crafty-vs-Loek van Wely.
>Look at it and the -4.xx eval!
Blitz games are different. Here my limit for stopping is +10. Or sometimes
+infinity. ;-)
And van Wely is not a computer, BTW. :)
>I know and that is why I set the time control either 40/120+g/60 or if not
>possible g/180.
I usually prefer playing at these time controls, too, but the SC is an
exception. And this is also yet another remainder of the "old times", since e.g.
Rebel 9 had no "g/180" time control...
>>Yes, but as they always say, that is "not statistically significant". :)
>
>ONE may not be statistical relevant. BTW a 9 round-robin isn't either...
Then again, what is? Not even SSDF... Or just about any tourney in any sports
category in the world, for that matter. ;-)
>But if you adjust say 3 or more games for a program in the tourney the result
>can be VERY different.
True. That's why I keep track of these adjudications ("adjustment" has a
connotation of biased influence, I think) in order to avoid them summing up to
be significant.
>>where Rebel was up +3 against Genius and did not win (but this was a rapid
>>game).
>
>I know such strange games/evals.
They used to be rare, but seem to be becoming more and more common since many
strong programs can now save a game which would have been dead lost 2 years ago.
>Fine, finally we agree. :-)
What a red letter day for our calendar! ;-))
---
Shep
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.