Author: Aaron Tay
Date: 05:09:53 02/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2001 at 09:31:12, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: >On February 16, 2001 at 00:34:16, Aaron Tay wrote: >>2) Given all the complains about the uneven quality of Rating lists, what >>factors would you look for in deciding if a rating list is a quliaty one? >> >>Eg >> >>* Number of games >>* testing procedures [handling of bugs in book learning etc] >>* Quality of testers [Would fewer quality testers be better than lots?] >>* Transparancy [availability of games?, policy statements,audits? ] >>* Perceived indepedence >>* Hardware used >> >> >>any more? And how do the various rating lists either by organisations [SSDF], >>e-zines [e-bit, selective search] or single persons [eg Frank Quisinsky's list] compare acording to the citerias? >>It seems to me that SSDF seems to be the mostly superior in most areas, altough,they need to work on the perceived indepedence part.. >I think that SSDF can not be more independent than we are. >Complete independent. > >Venlig hilsen >Hans Christian Lykke (SSDF) That's worthless if people [some anyway] don't PERCEIVE that you are independent.
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.