Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 02:57:11 06/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2001 at 05:35:30, stuart taylor wrote:
>On June 13, 2001 at 05:05:45, Marcus Kaestner wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>It is the most reliable tool that we have to evaluate the chess programs. The
>>>difference in the opponents each program has to face does not matter from a
>>>mathematical point of view.
>>
>>i think you are wrong!
>>
>>having now over two years of experience with my own chessbits-lists, i can say
>>to you that it is VERY easy to place a program with a HIGHLY overrated (or
>>underrated) position into the list.
>>
>>there are dozens of possibilities to fake a rating.
>>
>>i do not say that the ssdf fakes, i only say that it DOES matter which opponents
>>you choose.
>>
>>marcus
>
>Of course it does!
>If you play a 1200 elo rated player you can be sure to win 100% of times, and
>you play 100,000 games, you will have got a rating of 3000 long long before
>then.
No you are definitely wrong.
Due to the elo calculation formulas, a program which wins 100% of its games
against a 1200 elo opponent will have a rating of exactly 1600.
Far from 3000, isn't it?
Food for thoughts.
Christophe
> When I used to play vs. Hiarcs 6 and 7 and get my play rated, I always got one
>point for winning against the instant level, which was sooooo easy. If I needed
>to do it for a very important reason, I could be sure to get a 3000 elo rating
>that way, but if I were plaing against its 2 min. per 60 moves, I would never
>even reach anywhere near what my true rating would be-between about 2200-2300
>elo.
>(though if "instant" means that the human must also play instant, then of
>course there's no hope for any human).One minute per game would be like a human
>"instant", if not two minutes.
>S.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.