Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Tiger - Is It Really 2696 ELO?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 18:01:12 12/23/99

Go up one level in this thread


On December 23, 1999 at 19:30:48, Amir Ban wrote:

>On December 23, 1999 at 15:05:57, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On December 23, 1999 at 06:32:32, Graham Laight wrote:
>>
>
>>>In the case of the SSDF computer pool, much of it has been there for a long
>>>time, and is known to be broadly correct.
>>
>>
>>No it isn't, but I also don't have enough time to turn this into a "statistics
>>101 course" and explain why it doesn't work like that.  If you look at how the
>>Elo formula works, the _last_ game you played influences your rating _far_ more
>>than the game you played 40 games ago.  That is simply how the statistics work
>>here.  So even if the original SSDF programs were _perfectly_ calibrated to some
>>human rating scale, the fact that 10 years has elapsed means that the effect of
>>that calibration is _long gone_...
>>
>
>The way SSDF calculate ratings, the order of games and when they were played has
>no consequence at all. They calculate ratings using the entire SSDF game history
>every time. It doesn't matter which game was played last. They would get the
>same ratings in whatever order the matches were played.
>
>When the SSDF calibrated their list, they fixed some reference. Since all their
>ratings are calculated in relative, not absolute terms, this reference, once
>fixed, is relevant forever and can't possibly grow out of date. Had they fixed
>that reference 10 points higher, for example, all ratings today would have been
>exactly 10 points higher, and this will still be true in 10 or 100 years.
>


That is _absolutely_ a flawed way of computing ratings of course, and if that
is true, the term "Elo" should _never_ be used in the same breath with "SSDF
ratings".  The Elo formula is quite well-defined...  and the 'order' is most
definitely imortant in the ratings...




>Note that all this doesn't mean that the ratings may not have drifted in some
>direction, but that's a different issue.
>
>Amir



I think the 'drift' is simply caused by comp-vs-comp games, which seems to
exaggerate rating differences...



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.