Author: Chris Carson
Date: 08:41:38 01/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2000 at 10:53:50, Bertil Eklund wrote: >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 Thanks for confirming this. :) Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.