Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Corection 1Re: Rating calculations in matches

Author: Eelco de Groot

Date: 17:25:16 08/02/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 02, 2001 at 19:53:15, Eelco de Groot wrote:

>On August 02, 2001 at 14:59:58, Vicente Fernández wrote:
>
>>Suppose two players meet in a 24 game match. How does one calculate the final
>>ratings? Is it correct to calculate the ratings change after each game result?
>>Shall I calculate all 24 games according to the initial rating of both players?
>>Suppose we have a match between two players rated 2000; if player 1 wins all the
>>games, shall I rate him 24 wins against a 2000 player or should I take into
>>account the rating changes after each round?
>>
>>I tried both ways on the CERN Chess Club Elo rating calculator,
>>http://chess.cern.ch/ratings/elocalc.en.shtml using a progress coeficient of 24,
>>and the results change in about 6 point. The performance rating is completely
>>diferent.
>>
>>Thanks
>
>
>
>Vicente,
>
>Sometimes we have some very bright mathematicians over here who might answer
>this but if I would have to say something about it, without knowing what the
>official rules are, I'd say that you have a problem especially with 100 %, or if
>you like 0 %, scores. If you make no assumptions about how the ratings are
>distributed in the population, id est every rating is equally likely, then the
>winners would all be concentrated around infinity. This would be both their TPRs
>AND their "most likely ratings" assuming you had a very long match; for
>calculating the TPR you don't have to know anything about the length of a match.
>But if the match becomes shorter for the "most likely ratings" you have to go
>look at the reliability of the original ratings. If these were based on 1000
>games (against some "standard" calibrated opposition) and the match just 24
>games the TPRs would still approach infinity and zero but the "most likely
>ratings" would be a lot closer to the originally calculated ratings.
>
>If you make other assumptions about how the ratings are distributed in the
>population the "most likely ratings" will go vary too. For example to calculate
>the chance that the winner is actually 2400 if the beaten player is 2000 you
>first have to calculate 1. the chance of finding a 2400 player in the population
>and then 2. the chance that he could win all 24 games.  And for the "most likely
>rating" 3. the chance that this 2400 player had acquired only a 2000 rating
>first.
>
>Point 2 is straightforward and always the same if you follow the standard elo
>calculations, but point 1 depends on what population or "pool' of players you
>are working with. Point three depends also on the pool AND on the number of
>games used for calculating the first rating AND on the method of doing such a
>rating calculation AND on the possibility that ratings may change over time...
>So this "most likely rating" becomes an elusive property if you don't know these
>characteristics exactly, even if you knew that the elo-system for the rest was a
>very accurate description of chessplaying abilities.
>
>
>That has nothing to do with the TPRs: with a 24-0 results as far as I know these
>should be infinity and zero respectively for winner and loser following standard
>elo-method, not the lineair or some other approximation of it.
>
>
>Probably I have lost all my readers by this  point and they'll never read
>anything I write again! Sorry about my dense formulations this is just a
>personal and non mathematically precise way I would describe it.
>
>
>Normally I think for TPR you should keep the original ratings of the opponents
>intact for calculating the average opposition, no matter what kind of
>approximation you will use then to calculate TPR.
>
>Kind regards,
>Eelco

Sorry, I'm not following my own rules; the rating of the opponents should stay
2000 in calculating a TPR so a winner would then get a TPR of 2000 + infinity, a
losing player 2000 - infinity, this is also approximately minus infinity and not
exactly the same as zero. Well I think that's what my calculator would say if
only it could work with infinities.

 Eelco



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.