Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:12:17 06/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 10, 2000 at 17:07:14, Amir Ban wrote: >On June 10, 2000 at 08:28:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 10, 2000 at 04:03:07, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On June 09, 2000 at 23:17:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 09, 2000 at 15:18:01, Amir Ban wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 09, 2000 at 10:33:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 09, 2000 at 06:26:17, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On June 08, 2000 at 16:10:16, blass uri wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On June 08, 2000 at 15:25:22, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Ok, here's my two cents: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The most likely estimate for the game outcome is the overall match result >>>>>>>>>(33.5/41). The probability for any *particular* sequence of 10 games (say the >>>>>>>>>last 10) to be 10-0 is (33.5/41)^10 = 13.3%. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If you want probability for any sequence anywhere, the probability is larger, as >>>>>>>>>you point out. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If you suspect the 10-0 result, you can argue that the most likely estimate >>>>>>>>>should discount this result, so this gives you a probability of (23.5/31)^10 = >>>>>>>>>6.3%. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you use the most likely estimate >>>>>>>>The probability for 10:0 is smaller than (23.5/31)^10 because there are draws. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The result was +20, =7.-4 so if you use the most likely estimate you get >>>>>>>>probability (20/31) for Junior to win >>>>>>>>7/31 for a draw and 4/31 for a loss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>(20/31)^10=0.012493... so the probability is less than 2% >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I ignored the fact that the white probability is different from the black >>>>>>>>probability but not ignoring it does not change much the result because you get: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>(10/15)^5*(10/16)^5 that is 0.012558... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you do not ignore the last 10 games and ignore the colours you get >>>>>>>>(30/41)^10=0.043992... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>> >>>>>>>All right, you are right about the draws. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>My presentation of the problem was more complicated than necessary. Here is the >>>>>>>question in its simplest form: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A match of 41 games concluded with 30 wins, 7 draws and 4 losses. It is unknown >>>>>>>in which order these wins/draws/losses occurred. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Out of all possible permutations with the same result, what percent of the >>>>>>>permutations have a sequence of at least 10 wins ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is clear cut question for the combinatorics gurus in this newsgroup. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>There seems to be gross difference of opinion about the result of this, so until >>>>>>>we get an answer, we can have an opinion poll about the result. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>My guess: 40%. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Amir >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>As I mentioned before, I am simply worried that reusing the engine over and >>>>>>over might be the problem. IE if you just crank up two copies of crafty and >>>>>>let 'em play, over and over, if one breaks, it will remain broken and will >>>>>>likely lose every game (or nearly every game) from that point forward. >>>>>> >>>>>>Since I don't test like this, it is very possible... >>>>>> >>>>>>And that would explain a sudden string of 0's at the end... and it would >>>>>>explain things if the 0's stop after a restart or another tester plays games, >>>>>>since he would start a new crafty. >>>>> >>>>>Of course, that is a possible explanation for this otherwise incredible result. >>>>> >>>>>Another possible explanation is that there is a bug in Junior that something >>>>>doesn't reset correctly and the engine starts playing stronger than intended, >>>>>and wins every game. I definitely need to look into that. >>>>> >>>>>Amir >>>> >>>> >>>>Perhaps while you are looking, you can look into losing the sarcasm? >>>> >>>>eh? >>>> >>>>I don't ever recall you going 10-0 vs crafty on ICC. >>> >>>It's not easy to do this while being censored. Not to mention being noplayed >>>after 4 consecutive games. >>> >>>Amir >>> >> >> >>You know very well why you were censored. You made the direct claim, here in >>CCC, that I specifically wrote crafty so that if it was getting mated, it would >>sit and run out of time rather than letting the opponent mate me. You knew that >>was false. I (and others) pointed out lots of games on ICC that ended in crafty >>getting mated without it flagging, but you _never_ retracted the ridiculous >>claim. >> >>If you want to try a match to see if you can go 10-0, just tell me when and >>where to show up. I'll be there. >> > >I think this match already took place at SSDF. Yes, but with a possibly flawed setup of some sort. However, I don't give a lot of thought to such, so it isn't super-important. > >This is totally nuts besides. How can you refuse to play me and challenge me at >the same time ? > >Amir > I believe I played you in the first ICC event, remember? So it is _easy_ to refuse to play someone in general, but agree to a specific match. At least it is easy for _me_... > > >>And as I recall, you were automatically +noplayed for lots of disconnects, >>not for playing 4 games in a row... This is all old news... >> >> >> >> >>> >>>> So _something_ is >>>>definitely "up".
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.