Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 17:35:27 01/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2001 at 11:17:15, Peter Kasinski wrote:
>On January 06, 2001 at 11:02:07, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On January 06, 2001 at 10:30:58, Peter Kasinski wrote:
>>
>>>On January 06, 2001 at 10:07:16, Hans Christian Lykke wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 06, 2001 at 08:46:57, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>You should let that match continue up to 50 games, instead of 40 games.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pichard.
>>>>
>>>>Why?
>>>
>>>I guess to increase the chance that Fritz will be ahead by then, which as we
>>>know (given a long enough series of games) is a mathematical certainty at some
>>>point in _any match_.
>>>
>>>:-)
>>
>>I do not know that it is a mathematical certainty.
>>
>>Even if program A has better rating than b it does not prove that A is better
>>than B in a match so it is possible that Deep Fritz will never lead the match
>>when the number of games is not important.
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>A program can lead the match at some point _without_ being necessarily better
>than the opponent. That's actually the point.
>
>PK
You should check your statement once again.
If program A is weaker than program B, then it is less and less likely that A
scores better than B when the match continues.
A can lead the match on a small number of games, but on a large number of games
it is very unlikely.
The only purpose of letting the match go on is to have more certainty about the
result. It is not going to help the weakest program.
Christophe
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.