Author: Günther Simon
Date: 05:42:52 08/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2001 at 07:51:16, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 24, 2001 at 07:29:21, Günther Simon wrote: > >>On August 24, 2001 at 07:15:30, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:06:51, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>Here are the results by >>>>elostat program >>>> >>>>You can see that shredder is only 3th place micro based on the performance. >>>>Shredder is the world Micro champion by definition but Tiger and Rebel had a >>>>better performance. >>>> >>>> >>>>1 Deep Junior 7 : 2745 228 281 9 88.9 % 2384 22.2 % >>>>2 Quest (DeepFritz) : 2550 266 169 9 66.7 % 2430 44.4 % >>>>3 Chess Tiger 14.6 Gambit Tiger : 2499 291 229 9 55.6 % 2461 22.2 % >>>>4 Crafty 18.10X : 2467 291 165 9 55.6 % 2428 44.4 % >>>>5 Rebel : 2466 291 229 9 55.6 % 2428 22.2 % >>>>6 Shredder : 2466 266 249 9 66.7 % 2346 22.2 % >>>>7 Goliath : 2421 291 165 9 55.6 % 2382 44.4 % >>>>8 Gromit 3.9.5 : 2364 278 201 9 61.1 % 2285 33.3 % >>>>9 Ferret : 2359 291 229 9 55.6 % 2320 22.2 >>>>%10 Gandalf 5.0 : 2310 291 229 9 55.6 % 2271 22.2 >>>>% >>>>11 ParSOS : 2256 291 229 9 55.6 % 2217 22.2 % >>>>12 Diep : 2227 165 291 9 44.4 % 2265 44.4 % >>>>13 IsiChess X : 2166 201 278 9 38.9 % 2245 33.3 % >>>>14 Tao : 2165 229 291 9 44.4 % 2203 22.2 % >>>>15 Ruy Lopez : 2118 366 266 9 33.3 % 2238 0.0 % >>>>16 Pharaon : 2082 169 266 9 33.3 % 2202 44.4 % >>>>17 SpiderGirl : 2014 213 255 9 27.8 % 2180 33.3 % >>>>18 XiNiX : 1724 400 108 9 5.6 % 2216 11.1 % >>>> >>>>congratulation also for the Deep Junior team for winning the event convincingly >>>>when the difference from the second place is almost 200 elo and the hardware >>>>explain less than 70 elo difference. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I can add that I think that it may be a better idea to use elostat to decide >>>about the world champion in the future. >>> >>>I know that a lot of people are going to disagree but it is my opinion. >>>I prefer a complicated method that does more justive and not a simple method. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Sorry Uri - but this is really nonsens. >>You cant use ELO-Stat on a Swiss Tournament with 9 rounds as >>it is described by the author. ELO-Stat is designed to calculate >>ratings out of a pool of unknown rated progs with a very very lot >>of games. >>Therefor if you take a closer look at your table you would see that >>the error margin is at least 435!pts (Pharaon) and max 632!! (RuyLopez). >>And would you really believe Parallel SOS to be at 2256? :)) > >The question is not which program is better. >competitions of 9 rounds are not supposed to answer this question. > >The question is which program did better result. >The elostat answer this question better than the ranking > >The rating is also based on average of 2300 if I remember corectly and should >not be compared with humans. > > >>You must be a strong Tigerfan to post this very unlike post, as it >>is diametral to all your previous posts about stats?! > >I do not see contradiction with previous posts of myself. > >>(Btw hasnt Shredder won against Tiger or am I out of memory?) > >Yes >Shredder won against tiger. > >Uri Perhaps we have to accept that in this kind of WCHs luck always seems to play a strong role...? Another question: How much Multi-CPUs had Shredder and Tiger played? [I dont exactly know the opponents right now and I am too lazy to figure it out :))] In my opinion it was no good idea to mix the different groups up as it increases the lucky factor which is already given. Do you have some other(without ELO-Stat) suggestions to make this competetion more fair despite the fact that there are no more than 9rd playable? Günther
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.