Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:45:04 01/05/00
For ELO measurements (FIDE, PCA, SSDF or combined). Would a computer (or perhaps a person) get a higher rating in a tournament than in a match? My opinion is that a tournament is a better predictor of strength than a match. My reason (not based on any facts, it would be an interesting study) is that in a tournament a person (or machine) would face a broader range of styles than in a match. In a match, the person or computer might face an opponent that just plain does well against him/her/it (Even Fisher had a nimises). Also, in match play, each player can book up on the opponent and may get an advantage that might not be there in a tournament (more players to worry about). So, I think a tournament is a better measure of strength than a match. Second question: Would computer ratings benifit more from tournament play than match play? I vote that tournament play would produce higher (more accurate) ratings for computers against people than match play. Just my two cents. :) Best Regards, Chris Carson
This page took 0.04 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.