Author: stuart taylor
Date: 15:59:55 02/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2000 at 13:35:13, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: >On February 12, 2000 at 13:15:54, John Kilkenny wrote: > >>I think the list is pretty worthless anyway, but... > > >John, > > > >Mr. Hallsworth tells us that he used a 233Mhz Pentium/MMX system . It's on his >site in bold print. I agree with you and Bob Hyatt and think that an elo rating >of 2649 for the top program is horse-hockey, especially on an "old" 233Mhz >machine. > >Mr. Hallsworths' list is just an approximation and serves to guide the chess >program buying public. It is just as reliable as the SSDF list and is useful >only as a relative index. > >Have fun in computer chess, > > >Tim Frohlick I also would not mix up blitz with tournament timed games.I'm not even sure if I would mix up human and computer vs. computer.(I mean the results are very different to each other, and you are giving the results of one computer who has played 200 human games in comparison to one that has played 10 human games) All these things should be rated seperately, and only then combined for whoever is interested, or the reader can combine them himself. And there's another problem. I doubt that I would be rated above 2200 in my present state, but I feel quite confident of getting a higher rating than Kasparov by playing many hundreds of games against 1200 elo players only. Similarly with machines. Some are rated after playing 200 games against much much weaker machines. Others after 1000, or maybe none. Or it could be like that. Stuart Taylor
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.