Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 07:53:50 01/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2000 at 09:45:04, Chris Carson wrote: >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 Hi! You are right humans plays a lot better in single game matches and that is the main reason between the discrepance between the SSDF-list and these matches often with increment or double-increment time-controls. Regards Bertil SSDF
This page took 0.03 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.