Author: Mark Young
Date: 07:30:23 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 00:53:11, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On July 08, 2001 at 00:07:12, Curtis Williams wrote: > >>2833 KillerMachi(C) 3451 JRLOK(GM) 3275 KillerMachi(C) >>2829 Crawly(C) 3443 SpitFire(C) 3135 Weezer(C) >>2811 SandmanJr(C) 3429 scrappy(C) 3082 Foe-hammer(C) >>2738 EvilSilicon(C) 3375 Netsurfer(C) 3022 CraftyWiz(C) >>2726 Colossus(C) 3363 ChessBeta(C) 2970 Trojanx(C) >>2718 Aegis(C) 3314 RebelRex(C) 2954 Colossus(C) >>2713 ShredderX(C) 3309 L-Aronian(GM) 2947 diep(C) >>2711 Good-Boy(C) 3297 KillerMachi(C) 2935 Good-Boy(C) >>2703 OzsO(C) 3292 lorenzo(GM) 2902 heatstroke(C) >>2699 heatstroke(C) 3225 garompon(GM) 2902 valheru(C) >>2696 kooloo(C) 3222 valheru(C) 2878 Hawkeye(GM) >>2686 valheru(C) 3210 Weezer(C) 2871 Aegis(C) >>2676 Spendrups(C) 3201 bonvivant 2867 Rabin(IM) >>2669 BountyHunte(C) 3197 junior(GM) 2858 PIECEOFFCHI(C) >>2651 Wansi(C) 3187 Dreev(GM) 2833 LarryC(GM) >>2643 JRLOK(GM) 3180 Hawkeye(GM) 2827 giant-c(C) >>2641 JrChess 3169 swimmer(C) 2823 Wansi(C) >>2636 BrazilianMa(C) 3152 jeleen(GM) 2811 Gela(GM) >>2625 Foe-hammer(C) 3144 NewZorro(GM) 2793 Crawly(C) >>2622 Talmoves(C) 3141 Irina(GM) 2790 troii(C) >>2620 Eyssa(C) 3141 YearOfTheR(FM) 2780 Tiger14(C) >>2611 Deveraux(C) 3140 mikenty(IM) 2779 Lohman(C) >>Supe > >There's no text so I don't know what you are trying to imply by this. If you >are trying to say that Tiger is strong, Tiger is strong. However, there are >some facts about the account that should be made known: > >1) It only plays humans. >2) It only plays people rated in excess of almost 3100. > >Basically it only plays people who are on the "best" list. So this is yet >another "human-only" rating pig in the mold of Scrappy, the kind that is making >it very difficult for a program that plays a wide range of opponents to find any >titled humans to play. > >I think that approximately any good program could get that high on the list if >it trolled for people who wanted to get punished. > >bruce ICC or any online rating is meaningless. As you know it is very easy to spike ones rating on ICC. It is foolish for anyone to think Crafty or Tiger or Fritz is the strongest program based on ICC ratings alone. I do think the computer accounts should have the same rights as any other account to set formulas as they wish. It is ok to be a ratings hog...but I hate it. ICC should use Free styles ratings, along with a new ratings class. The new ratings class should do away with formulas, and you should be required to play any challenge by any player within 400 ratings point of your own. Refusal to accept a challenge or failure to maintain a certain activity level would cost rating points and standing in the new ratings class. Lastly ICC should promote the new ratings class as the official rating of ICC. Everyone would of course hate this, so it will never be done.
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.