Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Congratulation for chesstiger(better performance than shredder in wmccc)

Author: Miguel A. Ballicora

Date: 07:06:32 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

You forget the tournament strategy. Many times, you can adjust the contempt
because you know that a draw is extremely convenient or will give you the
title right away. Not to mention the selection of more or less agressive opening
books for a special round. Sometimes, a draw is the same as a loss and you risk.
That throws away any significance of a performance ELO in a 9 round tournament.
This also applies for any human tournament.

You can also have the weird situation where you got 8.5/9 and the one with 8/9
has a better elo performance. They drew each other but a couple of opponents
that play the 1st started to crash many games aftewards because of late minute
changes in the code etc. That was totally out of control of the winner. AFAIK
this kind of things happened before. Bucholz system is very unfair already
(sometimes), your proposition could be even more disastrous.
Besides, in a tournament you look for a fair champion, not absolute justice,
which BTW is impossible to attain (and it is not recommended to attain either!
otherwise is not an sporting event! a bit of randomness is necessary)

Regards,
Miguel


>
>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



This page took 0.01 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.