Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 18:14:12 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 17:05:56, Curtis Williams wrote: >Mr. Moreland it is a general practice of all computer accounts to play opponents >rated within 350-400 points of there rating. It only makes sense because >there's no gain for playing someone out of that range. So ask yourself if you >were 3400 what in the hell are you doing playing someone 1500? So it's >irrational for you to suggest that. The fact remains that as of this moment you will only play people rated in excess of 3076. As of this moment, that's 56 people and no other computers. You don't play other computers because lower-rated computers would challenge you and you would lose rating points. I don't suggest that you allow people rated 1500 to play it. That would amuse the 1500's but it wouldn't create good games. The 1500's would do better to play something that they have a chance of beating by playing "normal" chess. But 3076 seems like a pretty high cutoff point. What, you think that someone rated a mere 2900 or 3000 is not enough of a challenge? And surely someone rated a mere 2800 could provide "you" with some small challenge. Your comment about "no gain" from playing outside of that range says it all. >Spitfire is currently set to play anyone within 350 points of it's rating...it's >reasonable and definitely not trolling. Spitfire was once 1800 and progressed >through the rating structure with the same formula it uses now. So it has >achieved the 3400 rating by beating everyone in ICC in a fair manner. The account trolls for GM's who have a death wish. It's just like Scrappy in this regard. The rating doesn't come from beating "everyone" on ICC, it comes from playing only high-rated humans and generally hanging out in the bizarre end of the rating pool. >Your inflammed comments toward a simple post of progress suggest that you have a >hidden resentment towards Tiger and Crafty (programs with the ability to >interface with ICC) is it that you would like to see you program make it to >number? Whatever the case, don't blast my post because of your jealousies. >Tune your energy into something more constructive like creating a more >competitive program and maybe it too will make it to number one on ICC. My program was the first account on ICC to hit 3000. It has been number one on the server in various categories for months at a stretch. It has held server records in all three time control categories for periods measured in months or years. It's also been computer world title holder in blitz, twice. You may not know this because I never wrote a giant post ANNOUNCING any of this here. So I'm not jealous of "your" rating on ICC, nor do I think that I have anything I need to prove. >Spitfire is there as a training tool for players within that range who wish to >match it. It is ICC's policy for computers not to match humans so it is totally >the choice of humans to play these computers. There does exist strong humans, >who seek out strong computers to inflate there rating OR are they seeking out >the strongest tool of chess available to strengthen their play? It's up to >interpretation. Which you have displayed with your comments and are definitely >entitled to them. At the same time, I am entitled to mine and I will continue >to post my progress as I see fit. So come to grips with your insecurites and >move on. The humans are playing the highest-rated machine, in the hopes of getting rating points. It's like a slot machine -- people will play the one that hasn't paid off for a while. They won't play the lower rated computers because their own precious ratings would go up in a puff of smoke. Good luck with "your" continued progress. bruce
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.